linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Intel uncore pmu counting support

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: <1309443054.12449.56.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:10:54 +0200
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@...e.hu>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Intel uncore pmu counting support

On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 14:10 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > This series are cut to support uncore pmu counting only.
> > So uncore interrupt handling is not needed.
> >
> You're making the assumption that when counting, you can never construct
> a measurement that will cause a counter to overflow the 39 bits. If not, then
> you need interrupt handling even when counting.
> 

Also, I'm missing the stuff that maps everything to one active cpu in
the uncore mask. IIRC your previous postings had stuff like that.
--
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/