linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] perf update

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, 9 Jun 2011 13:43:13 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] perf update


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 16:56 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 
> > > Frederic Weisbecker (1):
> > >       perf: Split up buffer handling from core code
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  kernel/events/Makefile   |    2 +-
> > >  kernel/events/buffer.c   |  400 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  kernel/events/core.c     |  458 ++--------------------------------------------
> > >  kernel/events/internal.h |   70 +++++++
> > >  4 files changed, 487 insertions(+), 443 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Looks about right.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> 
> thanks, i'll pull it it and test it.

Note, i ended up applying it by hand:

 - fixed a build error,

 - streamlined the renaming: we really want this to be ring_buffer.c 
   (most of the complexity comes from this not being a simple buffer 
   but a ring-buffer)

 - i streamlined the naming around it: struct ring_buffer 
   internalized via internal.h (it does not clash with ftrace's 
   ring-buffer)

It all looks and reads much nicer now, but please double check the 
commit as well :-)

One other rename i'd like to do is:

   struct perf_output_handle		=> struct rb_handle

   perf_output_begin()			=> rb_open()
   perf_output_copy()			=> rb_write()
   perf_output_sample()			=> rb_write_sample()
   perf_output_end()			=> rb_close()

Which really makes it a lot more apparent that it's a regular 
input/output flow defined over the ring-buffer!

I can do this if this is fine with everyone. There will be no change 
in functionality.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/