[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160119163020.GJ6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:30:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: kan.liang@...el.com
Cc: acme@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
jolsa@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/8] perf: Add PERF_SAMPLE_PHYS_ADDR
On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 08:30:33AM -0500, kan.liang@...el.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
>
> For understanding how the workload maps to memory channels and hardware
> behavior, it's useful to collect address maps with physical addresses.
> This is not intended for detecting page sharing (which can be already
> done using the mmap inode), but for lower level hardware behavior
> studies.
This patch set completely lacks any useful example for why we should
entertain this.
> @@ -8269,6 +8275,11 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(perf_event_open,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> + /* Only privileged users can get kernel addresses */
> + if ((attr.sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_PHYS_ADDR) &&
> + !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> + return -EACCES;
> +
should that not also include a perf_paranoid_kernel() test?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists