linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/7] perf/x86/intel: Record branch type

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: <c1b593af-ab19-c82d-6b7f-5cd930d83254@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2017 08:49:44 +0800
From:   "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/7] perf/x86/intel: Record branch type



On 4/24/2017 8:47 AM, Jin, Yao wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/2017 9:55 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 08:07:50PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>>>   +#define X86_BR_TYPE_MAP_MAX    16
>>> +
>>> +static int
>>> +common_branch_type(int type)
>>> +{
>>> +    int i, mask;
>>> +    const int branch_map[X86_BR_TYPE_MAP_MAX] = {
>>> +        PERF_BR_CALL,        /* X86_BR_CALL */
>>> +        PERF_BR_RET,        /* X86_BR_RET */
>>> +        PERF_BR_SYSCALL,    /* X86_BR_SYSCALL */
>>> +        PERF_BR_SYSRET,        /* X86_BR_SYSRET */
>>> +        PERF_BR_INT,        /* X86_BR_INT */
>>> +        PERF_BR_IRET,        /* X86_BR_IRET */
>>> +        PERF_BR_JCC,        /* X86_BR_JCC */
>>> +        PERF_BR_JMP,        /* X86_BR_JMP */
>>> +        PERF_BR_IRQ,        /* X86_BR_IRQ */
>>> +        PERF_BR_IND_CALL,    /* X86_BR_IND_CALL */
>>> +        PERF_BR_NONE,        /* X86_BR_ABORT */
>>> +        PERF_BR_NONE,        /* X86_BR_IN_TX */
>>> +        PERF_BR_NONE,        /* X86_BR_NO_TX */
>>> +        PERF_BR_CALL,        /* X86_BR_ZERO_CALL */
>>> +        PERF_BR_NONE,        /* X86_BR_CALL_STACK */
>>> +        PERF_BR_IND_JMP,    /* X86_BR_IND_JMP */
>>> +    };
>>> +
>>> +    type >>= 2; /* skip X86_BR_USER and X86_BR_KERNEL */
>>> +    mask = ~(~0 << 1);
>> is that a fancy way to get 1 into the mask? what do I miss?
>>
>>> +
>>> +    for (i = 0; i < X86_BR_TYPE_MAP_MAX; i++) {
>>> +        if (type & mask)
>>> +            return branch_map[i];
>> I wonder some bit search would be faster in here, but maybe not big deal
>>
>> jirka
>
> I just think the branch_map[] doesn't contain many entries (16 entries 
> here), so maybe checking 1 bit one time should be acceptable. I just 
> want to keep the code simple.
>
> But if the number of entries is more (e.g. 64), maybe it'd better 
> check 2 or 4 bits one time.
>
> Thanks
> Jin Yao
>

Hi,

Is this explanation OK? Since for tools part, it's Acked-by: Jiri Olsa. 
I just want to know  if the kernel part is OK either?

Thanks
Jin Yao