linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/2] perf/core: change errno for sampling event not supported in hardware

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:	Fri, 13 May 2016 14:06:40 +0530
From:	Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:	Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	<linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<acme@...hat.com>, <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] perf/core: change errno for sampling event not
 supported in hardware

On Friday 13 May 2016 04:34 AM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
>> Ah.. which might be a hint that nobody is actually explicitly testing
>> for this and we might just get away with changing the ABI.
>>
>> Vince, what say you; shall we try and get away with it? ;-)
> 
> It's probably worth trying.
> 
> The only other time anyone else noticed was in this thread
> 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/11/136
> and I think the conclusion at the end of that was also that it's probably 
> worth changing.

I presume that the RFC patches I posted are fine or do we want any changes.