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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 10:13:07 +0100 From: Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com> To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> CC: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] arm64/perf: Rename Cortex A57 events On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 08:06:13PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:40:37PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:11:56PM +0100, Jan Glauber wrote: > > > The implemented Cortex A57 events are not A57 specific. > > > They are recommended by ARM and can be found on other > > > ARMv8 SOCs like Cavium ThunderX too. Therefore move > > > these events to the common PMUv3 table. > > > > I can't find anything in the architecture that suggests these event > > numbers are necessarily portable between implementations. Am I missing > > something? > > Aha, I just noticed appendix K3.1 (silly me for missing it...). > > Lemme check whether or not that mandates that those encodings can't be > used for wildly different things. To me it looks like we would just have duplicated code without the patch, and at least the event types (e.g. L1D_CACHE_RD) should be identical across implementations. But I don't care too much, so please tell me if should drop the patch or keep it. thanks, Jan > Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists