linux-kernel - Re: Drop WARN on AMD lack of perfctrs

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:	Fri, 17 May 2013 11:04:51 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gleb@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Drop WARN on AMD lack of perfctrs

On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:34:20PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:55:58PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> > iirc the reason was the different msr range that is switched on fam15h
> > with a different counter to counter msr offset of 2 instead of 1. The
> > code relies on the assumption that the msrs exist on that cpu. Thus
> > the warning if not. Also note that code may have changed in 3.10 in
> > that area.
> 
> Stupid question: why is check_hw_exists() *after* the vendor-specific
> counter detection code in init_hw_perf_events() even though it is
> supposed to check whether hardware is emulated?

Mostly so that check_hw_exists() doesn't need to know about the vendor
specifics like where the MSRs live, how many there are etc..


--
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/