linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] perf record: add meta-data support for pipe-mode

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: <4FBE602C.7040503@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2012 10:22:04 -0600
From:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
CC:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] perf record: add meta-data support for pipe-mode

On 5/24/12 10:19 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, May 24, 2012 at 09:36:35AM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
>> On 5/22/12 11:51 AM, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>>> The problem is that the headers as they are written to the file need
>>> seeking in the file to update the offset table. That is NOT possible when
>>> you operate in pipe mode. As such you need to inject the header infos
>>> very much like kernel PERF_RECORD_*. That is also why you have
>>> perf inject -b. Buildids are added at the end of the run in file mode,
>>> and that's another seek to the offset table if I recall correctly.
>
>> Perhaps I am being too simple minded here, but why not dump the
>> features to the pipe as a series of structs when the perf session is
>> created?
>
>> struct pipe_data {
>> 	u32 length;
>> 	u32 type;
>> 	char data[0];		
>> }
>
>> It would require the features to be written to a buffer first to get
>> the length, but that's manageable without too much code change.
>> Endianness would need to be handled -- maybe a u8 flags at the
>> beginning.
>
> I guess this comes down to somebody prototyping it. The way its being
> done is just the easiest one, and one that at least Peter dislikes a lot
> ;-)
>
> - Arnaldo

I don't know about that 'easy' comment; that patch is fairly long. Hence 
my question about whether synthesized events are acceptable before 
spending time on it. ;-)

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/