linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] perf/core: Add PERF_RECORD

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAM9d7ch78fdk+-uqsdRDN6mVZ0Q-gP+0bQHYygFhBNJyuPDfGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Jan 2020 22:46:58 +0900
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] perf/core: Add PERF_RECORD_CGROUP event

Hi Peter,

Happy new year!

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 9:51 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 03:07:51PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
> > @@ -7564,6 +7567,105 @@ void perf_event_namespaces(struct task_struct *task)
> >                       NULL);
> >  }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * cgroup tracking
> > + */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
> > +
>
> <snip>
>
> > +
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * mmap tracking
> >   */
>
> > @@ -12581,6 +12685,12 @@ static void perf_cgroup_css_free(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css)
> >       kfree(jc);
> >  }
> >
> > +static int perf_cgroup_css_online(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css)
> > +{
> > +     perf_event_cgroup(css->cgroup);
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int __perf_cgroup_move(void *info)
> >  {
> >       struct task_struct *task = info;
> > @@ -12602,6 +12712,7 @@ static void perf_cgroup_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> >  struct cgroup_subsys perf_event_cgrp_subsys = {
> >       .css_alloc      = perf_cgroup_css_alloc,
> >       .css_free       = perf_cgroup_css_free,
> > +     .css_online     = perf_cgroup_css_online,
> >       .attach         = perf_cgroup_attach,
> >       /*
> >        * Implicitly enable on dfl hierarchy so that perf events can
>
> CONFIG_CGROUPS vs CONFIG_CGROUP_PERF ?

Oh, I just saw this after sending v4 right before..
I think it should use CONFIG_CGROUP_PERF, will change.

>
> Other than that, I see nothing wrong here.

Thanks for the review!
Namhyung