linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 09/10] power8, perf: Change BHRB branch filter configuration

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: <52AAC356.1000308@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:50:38 +0530
From:	Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
CC:	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mikey@...ling.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, eranian@...gle.com,
	acme@...stprotocols.net, sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 09/10] power8, perf: Change BHRB branch filter configuration

On 12/09/2013 11:51 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> 
> As I said in my comments on version 3 which you ignored:
> 
>     I think it would be clearer if we actually checked for the possibilities we
>     allow and let everything else fall through, eg:
> 
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â /* Ignore user/kernel/hv bits */
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â branch_sample_type &= ~PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL;
> 
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY)
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â return 0;
> 
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL)
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â return POWER8_MMCRA_IFM1;
> Â 
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_COND)
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â return POWER8_MMCRA_IFM3;
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â return -1;
> 

Hey Michael,

This patch only adds support for the PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_COND filter, if the
over all code flow does not clearly suggest that all combinations of any of
these HW filters are invalid, then we can go with one more patch to clean
that up before or after this patch but not here in this patch. Finally the
code section here will look something like this. Does it sound good ?

static u64 power8_bhrb_filter_map(u64 branch_sample_type)
{
        u64 pmu_bhrb_filter = 0;

        /* BHRB and regular PMU events share the same privilege state
         * filter configuration. BHRB is always recorded along with a
         * regular PMU event. As the privilege state filter is handled
         * in the basic PMC configuration of the accompanying regular
         * PMU event, we ignore any separate BHRB specific request.
         */

        /* Ignore user, kernel, hv bits */
        branch_sample_type &= ~PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL;

        if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY)
                return pmu_bhrb_filter;


        if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL) {
                pmu_bhrb_filter |= POWER8_MMCRA_IFM1;
                return pmu_bhrb_filter;
        }

        if (branch_sample_type == PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_COND) {
                pmu_bhrb_filter |= POWER8_MMCRA_IFM3;
                return pmu_bhrb_filter;
        }

        /* Every thing else is unsupported */
        return -1;
}

--
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/