linux-kernel - Re: 'perf test tsc' failing, bisected to "sched/clock: Provide better clock continuity"

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]

Message-ID: <20170316192231.GB12825@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:22:31 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 'perf test tsc' failing, bisected to "sched/clock: Provide
 better clock continuity"

Em Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 04:21:38PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:36:17PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 07:11:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:53:11PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:01:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > > [root@...et ~]# perf test -v tsc
> > > > > 55: Convert perf time to TSC                   :
> > > > > Convert perf time to TSC: FAILED!
> > > > >     sched/clock: Provide better clock continuity
> > 
> > > > Right, ahunter also complained about this. I had a half arsed fugly
> > > > patch in the works. Let me see if I can improve and finish.
> >  
> > > The below seems to cure things for me...
> > 
> > Building...
> 
> Didn't apply to perf/urgent:
> 
> [acme@...et linux]$ patch -p1 < /wb/1.patch 
> patching file arch/x86/events/core.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 2243 (offset -1 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 2251 (offset -1 lines).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 2265 (offset -1 lines).
> Hunk #4 succeeded at 2273 (offset -1 lines).
> patching file arch/x86/include/asm/timer.h
> patching file arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 328.

perf/core almost super clean:

[acme@...icio linux]$ patch -p1 < /wb/1.patch 
patching file arch/x86/events/core.c
patching file arch/x86/include/asm/timer.h
patching file arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
patching file include/linux/sched/clock.h
patching file kernel/sched/clock.c
Hunk #3 succeeded at 154 with fuzz 2 (offset -7 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded at 231 (offset -7 lines).
Hunk #5 succeeded at 317 (offset -7 lines).
[acme@...icio linux]$

Building...