linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] perf: perf sched warning possibly due to clock granularity on AMD

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: <CABPqkBRXc989vxb99S2y4thppjp8tFAxjWhCyC1Hvb897-s3EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 6 Feb 2012 15:31:00 +0100
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	robert.richter@....com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] perf: perf sched warning possibly due to clock granularity
 on AMD

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 14:25 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> In summary, two issues:
>>   - Why is sched_clock_stable not set or even tested on recent AMD systems?
>
> I'll leave that for Robert to answer, also added Boris to the CC, him
> know AMD bits too.
>
Ok, good.

>>   - perf should not rely on fine granularity timestamps in the re-ordering code
>
> Uhm, what else is there?
I understand your point. I don't quite understand what the code is
supposed to do for odered
samples. I'd like Arnaldo to explain this warning first.
--
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/