linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] perf expr: increase max other

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: <CAP-5=fU7=FvpRr+PMsc_xebiETBgbNcv7U2jX3pJT87X7LAdtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 07:23:56 -0700
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Haiyan Song <haiyanx.song@...el.com>,
        Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Paul Clarke <pc@...ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] perf expr: increase max other

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:29 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:04:24PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > Large metrics such as Branch_Misprediction_Cost_SMT on x86 broadwell
> > need more space.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/util/expr.h | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/expr.h b/tools/perf/util/expr.h
> > index 0938ad166ece..4938bfc608b7 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/expr.h
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/expr.h
> > @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
> >  #ifndef PARSE_CTX_H
> >  #define PARSE_CTX_H 1
> >
> > -#define EXPR_MAX_OTHER 20
> > +#define EXPR_MAX_OTHER 64
> >  #define MAX_PARSE_ID EXPR_MAX_OTHER
> >
> >  struct expr_parse_id {
> > --
> > 2.26.2.303.gf8c07b1a785-goog
> >
>
> ok, and we should probably start to think about what Andi suggested
> in here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200224210308.GQ160988@tassilo.jf.intel.com/

Agreed, a hash table would make sense. This was the smallest value
that would let the test on x86 pass.

Thanks,
Ian

> jirka
>