linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf/core: Add macro to test for event exclusion flags

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: <20181123143213.GB1617@e119886-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Nov 2018 14:32:13 +0000
From:   Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf/core: Add macro to test for event exclusion
 flags

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:28:34PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com> writes:
> 
> > Add a macro that tests if any of the perf event exclusion flags
> > are set on a given event.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/perf_event.h | 9 +++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> > index 53c500f..89ee7fa 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> > @@ -1004,6 +1004,15 @@ perf_event__output_id_sample(struct perf_event *event,
> >  extern void
> >  perf_log_lost_samples(struct perf_event *event, u64 lost);
> >  
> > +static inline bool event_has_exclude_flags(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	struct perf_event_attr *attr = &event->attr;
> > +
> > +	return attr->exclude_idle || attr->exclude_user ||
> > +	       attr->exclude_kernel || attr->exclude_hv ||
> > +	       attr->exclude_guest || attr->exclude_host;
> > +}
> 
> Sorry to be a total PITA, but using "flags" plural suggests that it only
> returns true if there is more than one exclude flag set.
> 
> A better name would be event_has_exclude_flag() or maybe
> event_has_any_exclude_flag().
> 
> If you're doing a respin anyway it'd be nice to fix the name, but
> obviously it's not high priority.

No problem - I'll go with event_has_any_exclude_flag.

Thanks,

Andrew Murray

> 
> cheers