linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf-record: Create events initially disabled -- again

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: <4FB1B764.2060802@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 May 2012 19:54:44 -0600
From:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
CC:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues <lmr@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf-record: Create events initially disabled -- again

On 5/14/12 7:46 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> And we need to have all this logic in a central place, the "open" method
> of perf_evlist :-)
>
> The perf_target abstraction is the way to get there, but in the process
> I think we really need to have each new method with a 'perf test' entry
> and in addition to that an 'autotest'* entry to test the perf builtins.
>
> - Arnaldo
>
> * http://autotest.github.com/

Yes, I've seen the project and know that kvm leverages the framework. My 
knowledge ends there - never had a reason to try it out. With the vPMU 
in v3.3 we could use KVM to automate a fair bit of the testing.

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/