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  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, 24 Oct 2017 11:22:00 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <>
Cc:     "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "Hunter, Adrian" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/6] event synthesization multithreading for perf

* Liang, Kan <> wrote:

> For 'all', do you mean the whole process?


> I think that's the ultimate goal.  Eventually there will be per-CPU recording
> threads created at the beginning of perf record and go through the whole process.
> The plan is to do the multithreading step by step from the simplest case.
> Synthesizing stage is just a start.

So, why not do it like the kernel did: add all the threads, create the percpu 
files, and introduce a 'big perf lock' (big mutex) that is taken for all the 
current non-threaded perf functionality. This should be fairly straightforward to 
do and should be 'obviously correct'.

_Then_ start doing the hard threading work on top of this, like threading the 
synthesizing phase.

Doing the whole per CPU thread setup/teardown for just the synthesizing part of it 
looks like the wrong design.

I.e. what I'm suggesting is no extra threading work, just organizing it in a 
different fashion and increasing the life-time of the per CPU threads from 'perf 
startup' to 'perf shutdown'.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists