linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] perf pmu interface -v2

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1277998793.1917.212.camel@laptop>
Date:	Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:39:53 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, paulus <paulus@...ba.org>,
	stephane eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] perf pmu interface -v2

On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 16:31 +0100, MattFleming wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 05:02:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > Matt, you said it broke SH completely, but did you try perf stat? perf
> > record is not supposed to work on SH due to the hardware not having an
> > overflow interrupt.
> 
> perf record does work to some degree. It definitely worked before
> applying your changes but not after. I admit I haven't really read the
> perf event code, but Paul will know.

Ok, let me look at that again.

> > Which made me think, what on SH guarantees we update the counter often
> > enough not to suffer from counter wrap? Would it make sense to make the
> > SH code hook into their arch tick handler and update the counters from
> > there?
> 
> This was the way that the oprofile code used to work. Paul and I were
> talking about using a hrtimer to sample performance counters as
> opposed to piggy-backing on the tick handler.

Ah, for sampling for sure, simply group a software perf event and a
hardware perf event together and use PERF_SAMPLE_READ.

But suppose its a non sampling counter, how do you avoid overflows of
the hardware register?
--
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/