linux-kernel - Re: [DRAFT PATCH 2/3] perf: Implement Nehalem uncore pmu

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: <1288898929.2039.78.camel@laptop>
Date:	Thu, 04 Nov 2010 20:28:49 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"robert.richter@....com" <robert.richter@....com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [DRAFT PATCH 2/3] perf: Implement Nehalem uncore pmu

On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 17:59 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> I think using uncore PMU to measure per-thread is pretty much useless.
> Maybe it should not even be allowed. There is no way you can correlate
> the counts you're getting to a place in your program. Or put differently,
> sampling in per-thread mode using uncore is useless. 

Right, per-task uncore event should not be allowed. I think it as simple
as setting pmu::task_ctx_nr = perf_invalid_context.
--
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/