linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/Requirements/Design] h/w error reporting

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: <1289413460.2084.27.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:24:20 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ying.huang@...el.com, bp@...en8.de,
	tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mchehab@...hat.com,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/Requirements/Design] h/w error reporting

On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 13:05 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> Peter said at LPC that the perf buffering system was not designed to
> handle high speed tracing. But he also said he does not like the way the
> ftrace buffering works. 

You're not very good at listening, I said the perf infrastructure and
event handling mechanism isn't geared towards full throughput but
instead on sampling.

There is lots of code between getting the event and landing it in the
buffer. The buffer itself is perfectly suited for high speed low
overhead stuffs, the perf data format possibly not because its not
bitfield happy.




--
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/