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: <20210331153845.GB7815@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 16:38:46 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@....com>,
        Zachary.Leaf@....com, Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@....com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Itaru Kitayama <itaru.kitayama@...il.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/10] arm64: perf: Enable PMU counter direct access
 for perf event

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 04:08:11PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:31 AM Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > The logic here feels like it
> > > could with a bit of untangling.
> >
> > Yes, I don't love it, but couldn't come up with anything better. It is
> > complicated by the fact that flags have to be set before we assign the
> > counter and can't set/change them when we assign the counter. It would
> > take a lot of refactoring with armpmu code to fix that.
> 
> How's this instead?:
> 
> if (armv8pmu_event_want_user_access(event) || !armv8pmu_event_is_64bit(event))
>         event->hw.flags |= ARMPMU_EL0_RD_CNTR;
> 
> /*
> * At this point, the counter is not assigned. If a 64-bit counter is
> * requested, we must make sure the h/w has 64-bit counters if we set
> * the event size to 64-bit because chaining is not supported with
> * userspace access. This may still fail later on if the CPU cycle
> * counter is in use.
> */
> if (armv8pmu_event_is_64bit(event) &&
>     (!armv8pmu_event_want_user_access(event) ||
>      armv8pmu_has_long_event(cpu_pmu) || (hw_event_id ==
> ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_CPU_CYCLES)))
>         event->hw.flags |= ARMPMU_EVT_64BIT;

I thought there were some cases where we could assign cycles event to an
event counter; does that not happen anymore?

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ