| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1307081115350.2281@vincent-weaver-1.um.maine.edu> Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 11:24:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net> Subject: perf: more ABI breakage I guess I should have been noisier about this at the time. Linux 3.9 came with commit e259514eef764a5286873618e34c560ecb6cff13 that enabled AMD fam15h Northbridge support, by exposing the events as part of the core CPU. Then Linux 3.10 changed this with c43ca5091a374c1f6778bd7e4a39a5a10735a917 and split them out as a separate PMU. This of course breaks libpfm4 and thus PAPI, and so now that 3.10 has come out we've had multiple people complaining about this on the PAPI lists (I can never get them to come complain here, which is why I always look like the lone whiner in these cases). So can perf_event just break the ABI with impunity? How many kernel releases do we need to wait before we implement features? There's not really even a good backwards-compatible fix for this issue, as PAPI presents core-CPU events and uncore-CPU events through different interfaces. Vince -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists