linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/48] perf core: Add backward attribute to perf event

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:	Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:21:58 +0100
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Brendan Gregg <brendan.d.gregg@...il.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Cody P Schafer <dev@...yps.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>,
	Jérémie Galarneau 
	<jeremie.galarneau@...icios.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Kirill Smelkov <kirr@...edi.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, pi3orama@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/48] perf core: Add backward attribute to perf event

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:08:50PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 09:10:43AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> 
> SNIP
> 
> > +	if (is_write_backward(output_event) != is_write_backward(event))
> > +		goto out;
> > +
> > +	/*
> >  	 * If both events generate aux data, they must be on the same PMU
> >  	 */
> >  	if (has_aux(event) && has_aux(output_event) &&
> > diff --git a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> > index 37c11c6..80b1fa7 100644
> > --- a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c
> > @@ -233,6 +233,8 @@ out:
> >  int perf_output_begin(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> >  		      struct perf_event *event, unsigned int size)
> >  {
> > +	if (unlikely(is_write_backward(event)))
> > +		return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size, true);
> >  	return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size, false);
> 
> could this be just:
> 	return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size,
> 				   is_write_backward(event))
> 
> also not sure if it's worth to have __perf_output_begin
> if the only difference to perf_output_begin is 'backward'
> argument that could be figured out from the event argument
> anyway

nevermind my second comment, just saw it being used also in next patches ;-)

jirka