linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 4/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: add new data structures for free running counters

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180124101721.GQ2228@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:17:21 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: add new data structures
 for free running counters

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:00:58PM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 12:24:17PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > Oh, think a bit more.
> > > > I think we cannot do the same thing as we did for CPU PMU's fixed
> > counters.
> > > >
> > > > The counters here are free running counters. They cannot be start/stop.
> > >
> > > Yes free running counter have completely different semantics. They
> > > need a separate event code.
> > 
> > The only thing that matters is if they count the same thing or not.
> >
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> There is NO event available on the GPs, that is exactly the same as
> the free-running counters.
> 
> For example, the BW free-running counters count the requests associated
> with writes and completions.
> The most similar events on the GPs are DATA_REQ_{OF,BY}_CPU.* events.
> Except that some of their sub-events count requests which not completions.
> There are also other minor differences.
> So we don't have alternative events for the free-running counters.
> I think we have to use 0xff.

OK, but explicitly mention this as the reason for having to invent event
codes. Them being fixed purpose or free running isn't a valid reason for
that.