linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/32] Refresh Intel vendor 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y6M55I/gDRBAfPvc@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 21 Dec 2022 13:52:52 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Perry Taylor <perry.taylor@...el.com>,
        Caleb Biggers <caleb.biggers@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/32] Refresh Intel vendor events

Em Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:31:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:23:14PM -0500, Liang, Kan escreveu:
> > On 2022-12-15 1:47 a.m., Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > Use new repository [1] and converter script to regenerate Intel vendor
> > > metrics. In particular this change removes unnecessary json fields and
> > > correct uncore events that previously had a buggy converter.

> > Thanks Ian.

> > The patch series looks good to me.

> > Acked-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>

> b4 doesn't like it, I'll apply it manually, probably some went over
> message size limits?

Had to adjust the first one manually due, IIRC, to the hashmap changes
that went upstream via the bpf tree, then use b4 3 times, cherrypicking
ranges of the series to get all merged.

Ian, please check what happened so that this isn't this manual next
time.

- Arnaldo