linux-kernel - Re: Fw: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc/perf: Adjust callchain based on DWARF debug info

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:	Wed, 4 Jun 2014 14:08:01 +0200
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc/perf: Adjust callchain based on
 DWARF debug info

On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:47:10AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:

SNIP

> | 
> | 
> | could you please change this, so it's nop for arch != powerpc
> | via #ifdef I guess.. or some other smart way ;-)
> 
> I was trying to avoid the #ifdef in the middle of the function.
> 
> How about adding a PERF_CONTEXT_IGNORE and doing something like this:

hum, 2 arch calls.. seems too complicated.. :-\

so if you are already introducing PERF_CONTEXT_IGNORE, why
dont we go with the chain duplication/fixing in arch code
you mentioned before?

this way the callchain loop stays simple and it's extendbable
to future changes (I think u mentioned we could change more
than one entry in future..?)

thoughts.. anyone? ;-)

thanks,
jirka
--
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/