linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] perf, x86: Implement 64 bit counter support for IBS

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: <20110801061300.GB4590@erda.amd.com>
Date:	Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:13:00 +0200
From:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] perf, x86: Implement 64 bit counter support for IBS

On 29.07.11 13:01:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 15:46 +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> > The functions perf_event_set_period() and perf_event_try_update() can
> > be used as generic functions. They can replace similar code that is
> > duplicate across architectures.
> 
> We could perhaps place them in kernel/events/pmu-lib.c or so, a place to
> gather useful common code to pmu driver implementations.

As we already have kernel/events/core.c I suggest to put it into
.../common.c?

I planned to factor this out of current perf code for x86 and maybe
other architectures. Want to send separate patches independent from
ibs.

Should I add both functions already to the new file? Maybe this has
some implications to header and makefiles.

-Robert

-- 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center

--
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/