linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf-events: Add support for supplementary event registers v3

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, 18 Nov 2010 12:16:36 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, eranian@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf-events: Add support for supplementary event
 registers v3

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:12:59PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >  					  u64 enable_mask)
> >  {
> >  	wrmsrl(hwc->config_base + hwc->idx, hwc->config | enable_mask);
> > +	if (hwc->extra_reg)
> > +		wrmsrl(hwc->extra_reg, hwc->extra_config);
> >  }
> 
> Just wondering, shouldn't we program the extra msr _before_ we flip the
> enable bit?

Yes that makes sense.

> > + * Runs later because per cpu allocations don't work early on.
> > + */
> > +__initcall(init_intel_percore);
> 
> I've got a patch moving the whole pmu init to early_initcall(), which is
> after mm_init() so it would actually work.

So do you want to make  this patchkit depend on that patch?
Or just integrate it and then change later?

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/