linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] perf: Intel Cache QoS Monitoring support

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: <20141002084125.GB3003@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:41:25 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] perf: Intel Cache QoS Monitoring support

On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 07:51:24AM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Oct, at 02:42:05PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org> writes:
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > >
> > >  - Added Jiri Olsa's Acked-by to PATCH 02/11.
> > >
> > >  - Use x86_match_cpu() in intel_cqm_init() and make sure we grab the
> > >    hotplug lock to prevent races as pointed out by Andi Kleen in
> > >    PATCH 08/11.
> > >
> > >  - Delete a stale comment in commit message of PATCH 10/11.
> > 
> > No support for a modular driver?
> 
> I didn't include support for that because none of the other x86 pmu
> drivers are buildable as modules. Is there a reason for that?

Not really, the rapl driver could easily be a module, and I think there
were osme patches to make the uncore driver a module.

> It's not clear to me that it would be a worthwhile change to make this
> buildable as a module, since that would require a Kconfig entry and the
> user would be required to make a decision regarding whether or not they
> want to build CQM support.
> 
> It's much simpler to just build it in and enable it based on
> CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS + CONFIG_INTEL_CPU. In fact, that's one of the things
> I've always liked about the pmu drivers, if I move to a new machine and
> turn on PERF_EVENTS the correct drivers will be run.

Some people worry about the memory footprint of all that.. That said, I
think we can do without the Kconfig stuff if we allow CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
to be a tristate, in that case M would build everything that can be a
module as a module and keep the rest builtin.


--
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/