linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/19] perf, tools: Tighten detection of BPF events

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: <20170822082007.GA23985@krava>
Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2017 10:20:07 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/19] perf, tools: Tighten detection of BPF events

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:26:19PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> perf stat -e cpu/uops_executed.core,cmask=1/
> 
> would be detected as a BPF source event because the .c matches the .c
> source BPF pattern.
> 
> v2:
> 
> Originally I tried to use lex lookahead, but it doesn't seem to work.
> 
> This now extends the BPF pattern to match longer events, but then
> does an extra check in the C code to reject BPF matches that
> do not end with .c/.o/.obj
> 
> This uses REJECT, which makes the flex scanner slower, but
> that shouldn't be a big problem for the perf events.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>

seems ok, Arnaldo, could you run it with BPF/clang test machinery? ;-)

thanks,
jirka