linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/31] perf, core: Add generic intx/intx

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: <1348822920.3292.60.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:02:00 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
	acme@...hat.com, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/31] perf, core: Add generic intx/intx_checkpointed
 counter modifiers

On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 21:31 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> +                               intx           :  1, /* count inside transaction */
> +                               intx_checkpointed :  1, /* checkpointed in transaction */ 

I really hate those names.. what are they called in transactional memory
literature?

Also do we really need this? Using the event format stuff we could
equally well do:

{cpu/cycles/, cpu/cycles,intx/, cpu/cycles,intx_checkpointed/}

No need to push those bits through perf_event_attr::flags when you can
stuff then through perf_event_attr::config, esp. for very hardware
specific features.
--
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/