linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] perf, x86: large PEBS interrupt threshold

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: <53D9F1FA.6080106@intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:36:26 +0800
From:	"Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, acme@...radead.org,
	eranian@...gle.com, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] perf, x86: large PEBS interrupt threshold

On 07/31/2014 03:27 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> 
> OK, so no feedback on the 'pending' discussions we had wrt PEBS record
> generation?
> 
> No feedback on the correctness aspects of the overflow crap?
> 
> Just a new series, which I then have to dig through to figure out wtf
> changed?
> 
> A quick look at patch 6 reads like you still don't understand the issue
> right. There are no 'collisions' as such in PEBS record generation, or
> are there? See the earlier open discussion.

I'm sure collision only create one PEBS records. Actually, the patch description
was written by Andi.



> 
> _WHY_ are you sending me new patches without sorting the open points
> first?
> 


--
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/