linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 07/14] perf/x86/intel: Support hardware TopDown metrics

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190930140755.GE4581@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 30 Sep 2019 16:07:55 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, jolsa@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 07/14] perf/x86/intel: Support hardware TopDown metrics

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 03:06:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 06:41:21AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:

> > +static bool is_first_topdown_event_in_group(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	struct perf_event *first = NULL;
> > +
> > +	if (is_topdown_event(event->group_leader))
> > +		first = event->group_leader;
> > +	else {
> > +		for_each_sibling_event(first, event->group_leader)
> > +			if (is_topdown_event(first))
> > +				break;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (event == first)
> > +		return true;
> > +
> > +	return false;
> > +}
> 
> > +static u64 icl_update_topdown_event(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> > +	struct perf_event *other;
> > +	u64 slots, metrics;
> > +	int idx;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Only need to update all events for the first
> > +	 * slots/metrics event in a group
> > +	 */
> > +	if (event && !is_first_topdown_event_in_group(event))
> > +		return 0;
> 
> This is pretty crap and approaches O(n^2); let me think if there's
> anything saner to do here.

This is also really complicated in the case where we do
perf_remove_from_context() in the 'wrong' order.

In that case we get detached events that are not up-to-date (and never
will be). It doesn't look like that matters, but it is weird.