linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 21/22] perf cpumap: Trim the cpu_aggr

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:   Sat, 11 Dec 2021 20:24:46 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Paul A . Clarke" <pc@...ibm.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Riccardo Mancini <rickyman7@...il.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vineet Singh <vineet.singh@...el.com>,
        James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>, coresight@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, eranian@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/22] perf cpumap: Trim the cpu_aggr_map

On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 06:46:06PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> cpu_aggr_map__new removes duplicates, when this happens shrink the
> array.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/cpumap.c | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/cpumap.c b/tools/perf/util/cpumap.c
> index 8a72ee996722..985c87f1f1ca 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/cpumap.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/cpumap.c
> @@ -185,7 +185,12 @@ struct cpu_aggr_map *cpu_aggr_map__new(const struct perf_cpu_map *cpus,
>  			c->nr++;
>  		}
>  	}
> -
> +	/* Trim. */
> +	if (c->nr != cpus->nr) {
> +		c = realloc(c, sizeof(struct cpu_aggr_map) + sizeof(struct aggr_cpu_id) * c->nr);
> +		if (!c)
> +			return NULL;
> +	}

curious.. we should do this, but did you detect some big waste in here?

thanks,
jirka

>  	/* ensure we process id in increasing order */
>  	qsort(c->map, c->nr, sizeof(struct aggr_cpu_id), aggr_cpu_id__cmp);
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1.400.ga245620fadb-goog
>