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]
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