linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] perf record: dead code perf_event__synthesize_id

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 3 May 2018 09:15:58 +0300
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Shishkin, Alexander" <alexander.shishkin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf record: dead code perf_event__synthesize_id_index()

On 02/05/18 19:57, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 04:38:33PM +0000, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like perf_event__synthesize_id_index() is dead code in the current
>> tip
>> tree. I don't see any invocation of the function anywhere in perf.I
>> understand why
>> you'd want to keep the rest of the code related to  PERF_RECORD_ID_INDEX
>> because some perf.data file may have this user-level record type. But the
>> synthesize code is not needed anymore, in my opinion.
>>
>> Shouldn't we remove this code?
> 
> looks like there never was any user of it, probably some
> preparation for follow up that haven't happened yet.. Adrian?

Yes it is for AUX area sampling support, which we have patches for.  Just
waiting on Alex to get the kernel side accepted.