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:   Tue, 30 Aug 2016 08:47:24 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf/core: Check return value of the
 perf_event_read() IPI

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:58:41PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> couldn't we just call smp_call_function_single(cpu_to_read, __perf_event_read, ...
> once we read oncpu != -1 ?
> 

Yes, and at that point we can simply revert this WARN, because that is
exactly the same.

Which I think is what I'm going to do.

If oncpu is not valid, the sched_out that made it invalid will have
updated the event count and we're good.

All I'll leave is an explicit comment that we've ignored the
smp_call_function_single() return value on purpose.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists