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: <34EEDB74-35C5-49C4-9947-6C0248F194B3@fb.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Aug 2018 18:35:37 +0000
From:   Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
CC:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] perf: Sharing PMU counters across compatible
 events



> On Aug 30, 2018, at 8:13 AM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:03:13AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> 
> SNIP
> 
>> 
>> +	perf_event_remove_dup(event, ctx);
>> 	/*
>> 	 * We can have double detach due to exit/hot-unplug + close.
>> 	 */
>> @@ -1982,6 +2123,92 @@ event_filter_match(struct perf_event *event)
>> 	       perf_cgroup_match(event) && pmu_filter_match(event);
>> }
>> 
>> +/* PMU sharing aware version of event->pmu->add() */
>> +static int event_pmu_add(struct perf_event *event,
>> +			 struct perf_event_context *ctx)
>> +{
>> +	struct perf_event_dup *dup;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	/* no sharing, just do event->pmu->add() */
>> +	if (event->dup_id == -1)
>> +		return event->pmu->add(event, PERF_EF_START);
>> +
>> +	dup = &ctx->dup_events[event->dup_id];
>> +
>> +	if (dup->active_event_count) {
>> +		/* already enabled */
>> +		dup->active_event_count++;
>> +		dup->master->pmu->read(dup->master);
>> +		event->dup_base_count = dup_read_count(dup);
>> +		event->dup_base_child_count = dup_read_child_count(dup);
>> +		return 0;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/* try add master */
>> +	ret = event->pmu->add(dup->master, PERF_EF_START);
>> +
>> +	if (!ret) {
>> +		dup->active_event_count = 1;
>> +		event->pmu->read(dup->master);
>> +		event->dup_base_count = dup_read_count(dup);
>> +		event->dup_base_child_count = dup_read_child_count(dup);
> 
> should you read the base before calling pmu->add ?
> should be same for any dup event not just master
> 
> jirka

I am not sure I am following. The pmu is disabled when we call
event_pmu_add(). Why do we need to read before calling pmu->add()? 
And this is the first added dup event for this master, so we don't
need to worry about others. 

Does this make sense? 

Thanks for the review!
Song

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ