linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] x86, perf: Add an aperfmperf driver

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: <20150429090941.GO5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 11:09:41 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86, perf: Add an aperfmperf driver

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 02:25:37PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile
> index 80091ae54c2b..fadc822efc90 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile
> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS_INTEL_UNCORE)	+= perf_event_intel_uncore.o \
>  					   perf_event_intel_uncore_snb.o \
>  					   perf_event_intel_uncore_snbep.o \
>  					   perf_event_intel_uncore_nhmex.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL)		+= perf_event_aperf_mperf.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD)		+= perf_event_aperf_mperf.o

Does this actually work? I would expect it to go complain about having
to build it twice if you have both set.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_aperfmperf.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_aperfmperf.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..6e6d113bd9ce
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_aperfmperf.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
> +#include <linux/perf_event.h>
> +
> +#define APERFMPERF_EVENT_APERF 0
> +#define APERFMPERF_EVENT_MPERF 1
> +

> +static int aperfmperf_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
> +{
> +	if (event->attr.type != event->pmu->type)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	if (event->attr.config != APERFMPERF_EVENT_APERF &&
> +	    event->attr.config != APERFMPERF_EVENT_MPERF)
> +		return -ENOENT;

Once we pass the type test we know its 'our' event, and we can go return
fatal errors. No other PMU will pick this up.

This could therefore turn into an -EINVAL.

> +
> +	if (event->attr.config1 != 0)
> +		return -ENOENT;

Idem.

> +	/* no sampling */
> +	if (event->hw.sample_period)
> +		return -EINVAL;

You could have set pmu::capabilities =
PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_INTERRUPT which would also have killed that dead.

> +	/* unsupported modes and filters */
> +	if (event->attr.exclude_user   ||
> +	    event->attr.exclude_kernel ||
> +	    event->attr.exclude_hv     ||
> +	    event->attr.exclude_idle   ||
> +	    event->attr.exclude_host   ||
> +	    event->attr.exclude_guest  ||
> +	    event->attr.freq           ||
> +	    event->attr.sample_period) /* no sampling */
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	event->hw.idx = -1;
> +	event->hw.event_base = (event->attr.config == APERFMPERF_EVENT_APERF ?
> +				MSR_IA32_APERF : MSR_IA32_MPERF);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

The rest looks about right. Very simple thing indeed ;-)
--
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/