linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/3] perf, amd: Support for Family 16h L2I Performance Counters

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: <20130410122826.GD8686@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:26 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/3] perf, amd: Support for Family 16h L2I
 Performance Counters


* Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 13:49 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hmm.. the 15h old interface bits got merged? I thought I kept telling
> >> > that should be done like the intel uncore stuff since the hardware
> >> > interface wasn't retarded anymore.
> >>
> >> Ah well, that crap seems to have slipped in in Feb when I was still a
> >> near vegetable and not paying much attention.
> >>
> >> /me curses a bit.
> >>
> >> I don't suppose we can deprecate it and remove this stuff?
> >
> > I think we can - if there's a functional replacement.
> >
> Does the existing code expose a type in sysfs?
> If not then you cannot do this transparently, I am afraid
> because the syntax would be different, i.e., not cpu/...

That could be compatibility-bridged over in tooling?

I doubt these events are in heavy use.

> I reviewed the code and tested it. But at the time, I thought
> you had agreed on the approach used.

I did - but PeterZ has a point, so it would be nice if we could improve on that.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/