linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf intel-pt: Synthesize cycle events

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: <YjHfGrZovk3N/H0f@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Mar 2022 13:59:06 +0100
From:   "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@...gle.com>
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf intel-pt: Synthesize cycle events

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 01:19:46PM +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> I guess the good news is that the perf report coming out of your version
>> looks more likely to me; I have some functions that are around 1% that
>> shouldn't intuitively be that much (and, if I write some Perl to sum up
>> the cycles from the IPC lines in perf script, are more around 0.1%).
>> So perhaps we should stop chasing the difference? I don't know.
> That doesn't sound right.  I will look at it more closely in the next few days.

If you need, I can supply the perf.data and binaries, but we're talking
a couple of gigabytes of data (and I don't know immediately if there's
an easy way I can package up everything perf.data references) :-)

/* Steinar */