linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] perf crash fix

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1275568831.27810.35654.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 03 Jun 2010 14:40:31 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] perf crash fix

On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 14:35 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> I wanted to, but I thought we could avoid two indirect calls on each
> ticks and I was also afraid of breaking start/stop original semantics,
> more especially the role of perf_event_stop/start

Right, so you lost the fallback to ->enable/->disable, which would break
hardware PMU implementations that didn't actually implement
->start/->stop (pretty much all of them except x86).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/