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, 18 Jul 2017 14:37:34 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Add proper condition to run sched_task
 callbacks

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:29:32AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:

> because we have 2 places using the same callback
>   - PEBS drain for free running counters
>   - LBR save/store
> 
> both of them called from intel_pmu_sched_task
> 
> so let's say PEBS drain setup the callback for the event,
> but in the callback itself (intel_pmu_sched_task) we will
> also run the code for LBR save/restore, which we did not
> ask for, but the code in intel_pmu_sched_task does not
> check for that

Ah fair enough; Changelog confused me.

> I'm adding conditions to recognize the work that needs
> to be done in the callback
> 
> another option might be to add support for more x86_pmu::sched_task
> callbacks, which might be cleaner

Right; either that or pull the condition into the functions themselves
to create less churn. Something like so I suppose...


diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
index aa62437d1aa1..2d533d4c0e2c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
@@ -3265,10 +3265,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_cpu_dying(int cpu)
 static void intel_pmu_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
 				 bool sched_in)
 {
-	if (x86_pmu.pebs_active)
-		intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
-	if (x86_pmu.lbr_nr)
-		intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
+	intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
+	intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
 }
 
 PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(offcore_rsp, "config1:0-63");
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
index c6d23ffe422d..6ee7ebdc8555 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
@@ -606,12 +606,6 @@ static inline void intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer(void)
 	x86_pmu.drain_pebs(&regs);
 }
 
-void intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
-{
-	if (!sched_in)
-		intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer();
-}
-
 /*
  * PEBS
  */
@@ -816,6 +810,14 @@ static inline bool pebs_needs_sched_cb(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
 	return cpuc->n_pebs && (cpuc->n_pebs == cpuc->n_large_pebs);
 }
 
+void intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
+{
+	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
+
+	if (!sched_in && pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc))
+		intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer();
+}
+
 static inline void pebs_update_threshold(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
 {
 	struct debug_store *ds = cpuc->ds;
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
index eb261656a320..955457a30197 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
@@ -380,8 +380,12 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_save(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
 
 void intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
 {
+	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
 	struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx;
 
+	if (!cpuc->lbr_users)
+		return;
+
 	/*
 	 * If LBR callstack feature is enabled and the stack was saved when
 	 * the task was scheduled out, restore the stack. Otherwise flush

Powered by blists - more mailing lists