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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F4D111A.8020001@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:38:34 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
CC:	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>, 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 02/28/2012 07:36 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> 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.

It depends on which direction you expect the code to grow.  These hooks
seem reasonable, so I think they should be generic.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/