linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] perf: Sanitize perf directory structure, p1

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:	Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:39:44 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] perf: Sanitize perf directory structure, p1

* Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:

> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> so what better time to do that fun than during the holidays when no one
> else is producing patches. :-)
> 
> Anyway, here's a part one conversion of the AMD perf events facilities.
> Directory structure looks like this:
> 
> arch/x86/events/
> |-- amd
> |   |-- core.c
> |   |-- ibs.c
> |   |-- iommu.c
> |   |-- iommu.h
> |   `-- uncore.c
> |-- core.c
> `-- Makefile
> 
> and I've kept the churn at a mininum. Holler if something's not kosher.

So it is only now that I noticed that we have both 'core.c' and 'uncore.c', which 
is slightly bit confusing: the core.c's we have around the kernel denote core 
subsystem functionality - not CPU core functionality. If we have uncore.c around, 
confusion might ensue.

OTOH maybe it's not a big issue and we can just live with it. I'd hate to see 
main.c. Maybe rename 'uncore.c' to 'cpu_uncore.c'? OTOH that sounds a bit silly 
too. So maybe leave it as you named them.

Thanks,

	Ingo