linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: make perf.data more self-descriptive (v5)

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:	Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:03:20 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...e.hu, dsahern@...il.com,
	robert.richter@....com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: make perf.data more self-descriptive (v5)

Hi Stephane!

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:
>> So how important is this information? The output is going to be somewhat
>> awkward for very large CPU counts... :-)
>>
> It is useful to determine how CPUs share caches for instance.
> It can get large but large, but the meta-data header is not printed by
> default, you need to request it with the -I option.

Well, sure but it blocks rest of the interesting information too. It seems to me
that the CPU information could be truncated to some sane limit by default and
introduce a command line option for users that really want to see all of it.

We see patches to fix up kernel boot logs, for example, for this all the time
so it seems rather silly to make the same mistake for shiny new code, no?

                          Pekka
--
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/