linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] perf/sdt/x86: Move OP parser to tools/perf/arch/x86/

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, 22 Mar 2017 08:22:07 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        alexis.berlemont@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] perf/sdt/x86: Move OP parser to tools/perf/arch/x86/

Em Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:00:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:10:49 -0300
> Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Em Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 10:52:17AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> > > Thanks Masami for the review.
> > > 
> > > On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:41 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:41 +0530
> > > > Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> SDT marker argument is in N@OP format. N is the size of argument and
> > > >> OP is the actual assembly operand. OP is arch dependent component and
> > > >> hence it's parsing logic also should be placed under tools/perf/arch/.
> > > >>
> > > > Ok, I have one question. Is there any possibility that N is different
> > > > size of OP? e.g. 8@dil, in this case we will record whole rdi.
> > > > is that OK?
> > > 
> > > By looking at list of markers on my x86 Fedora25 box, yes, it's possible
> > > for case when register size used in OP is more than size specified by N.
> > > For example, -4@68(%rbx). But I don't see any argument which specifies
> > > higher size in N compared to size of register in OP, like you mentioned
> > > in your example.
> > 
> > Masami, can I have your Acked-by for 3-5/5 in this series?
> 
> Arnaldo, as I reviewed, this patch still have some discussion points.
> Others are good to me.

That is ok, waiting for the next steps then.

Thanks for the update,

- Arnaldo