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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 00:18:42 -0800 From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf, bpf: Retain kernel executable code in memory to aid Intel PT tracing On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 09:54:01AM +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > > Which is not really a real use-case. .. > > perf analysis with PT becomes inaccurate and main goal > > of retaining accurate instruction info is not achieved. > > For the majority of real use-cases, yes it is. In our fleet not a single server is using Intel PT, yet you're proposing to penalize all of them with shrinker-based JIT freeing? There is no negotiation here. NACK
Powered by blists - more mailing lists