linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH update 0/3] HW-latency: hardware latency test 0.10

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]

Date:	Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:30:52 +0800
From:	Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com>
To:	arnd@...db.de, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH update 0/3] HW-latency: hardware latency test 0.10

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 09:48 PM, Luming Yu wrote:
>
>> Update the previous patch series to ACK all comments I've recevied so far
>> for the tool: e.g. 1.Acked Jon Masters in source code as many code are from
>> jcm, thanks very much Jon. 2. squashed all changes against new file I added into
>> one. 3. Make it useful on non-x86.
>
> Thanks for taking this and doing the heavy lifting to get it upstream! I
> wrote the original SMI detector really for RT debug purposes as we had
> OEM systems that would generate large latencies and it was easier to
> prove the point with nice graphs showing where the BIOS was injecting
> unwanted SMIs. Glad to see the work being done to make it more generic
> in nature. Maybe I'll come back with some ARM patches ;)
>
> Actually this exercise was very informative because it has helped shape
> my input on ARMv8 designs. I'm very keen to get away from a world in
> which world+dog feature is implemented inside an SMI-like context. It
> should be done via a dedicated management processor (on-chip) instead.
>
> Jon.
>

thanks Jon,

ping Arnd,  would you take this into your tree?

The value is when the feature finally done, we can finally have a
reliable tool  to count on for automatically sorting out hardware
problems and differences that really matter to designing your software
stack on bare metal, which means a lot to many of us dedicated to
hardware development/enabling as a software engineer, especially when
you have two similar platforms and need to rule out hardware latency
that could be the root cause.. in many case, people would have to dig
into various specs and lost...

I'd be glad to do anything to push this tool into upstream.  Please
let me know your thoughts. Thanks !!!! /l
--
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/