linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: Fix HO/GO counting with SVM disabled

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: <4F4D10A9.5010707@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:36:41 -0700
From:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, joro@...tes.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: Fix HO/GO counting with SVM disabled

On 2/28/12 10:24 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/28/2012 05:55 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>>
>>   __init int amd_pmu_init(void)
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> index 5fa553b..773fee2 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>>   #include<linux/ftrace_event.h>
>>   #include<linux/slab.h>
>>
>> +#include<asm/perf_event.h>
>>   #include<asm/tlbflush.h>
>>   #include<asm/desc.h>
>>   #include<asm/kvm_para.h>
>> @@ -575,6 +576,8 @@ static void svm_hardware_disable(void *garbage)
>>   		wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_TSC_RATIO, TSC_RATIO_DEFAULT);
>>
>>   	cpu_svm_disable();
>> +
>> +	x86_pmu_disable_virt();
>>   }
>>
>>   static int svm_hardware_enable(void *garbage)
>> @@ -622,6 +625,8 @@ static int svm_hardware_enable(void *garbage)
>>
>>   	svm_init_erratum_383();
>>
>> +	x86_pmu_enable_virt();
>> +
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>
>
> These should go into x86.c.  If the functions later gain meaning on
> Intel, we want them to be called (and nothing in the name suggests
> they're AMD specific).
>

I was to suggest the reverse: since this patch addesses an AMD bug, why 
not push those functions into perf_event_amd.c and make them dependent 
on CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD as well.

David
--
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/