linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf-events: Add support for supplementary event registers

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]

Date:	Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:42:03 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	fweisbec@...il.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mingo@...e.hu,
	acme@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf-events: Add support for supplementary event
 registers

On 11/11/2010 7:06 PM, Stephane Eranian wrote:

Thanks for the review.

> One thing I noticed in your patch is that you don't special
> case the configuration where HT is off. In that case, the
> sharing problem goes away. I think you could override
> either way during init.

The allocator should handle that transparently. With HT off the resource is
always free. Or do you see any concrete problems with the current code path?

> Some more tidbits:
> - OFFCORE_RESPONSE_0 is 0x01b7
> - OFFCORE_RESPONSE_1 is 0x01bb
>
> The umask is not zero but 1. Dont' know if you get
> something meaningful is you pass a umask of zero.

Hmm I seem to get events that look meaningful with 0. But you're right 1
is better. I used that in manual tests, but it wasn't in the cache number
mappings. I'll fix that for the next version.

-Andi

--
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/