linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf: arm_cspmu: Support implementation specific validation

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: <20230622093450.00004ede@Huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2023 09:34:50 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com>
CC:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@...dia.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf: arm_cspmu: Support implementation specific
 validation

On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 18:11:40 -0700
Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com> wrote:

> Some platforms may use e.g. different filtering mechanism and, thus,
> may need different way to validate the events and group.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com>
FWIW given it's so simple...
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

> ---
>  drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c | 8 +++++++-
>  drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.h | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> index fafd734c3218..471d6d7ac81a 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> @@ -553,7 +553,7 @@ static void arm_cspmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu)
>  static int arm_cspmu_get_event_idx(struct arm_cspmu_hw_events *hw_events,
>  				struct perf_event *event)
>  {
> -	int idx;
> +	int idx, ret;
>  	struct arm_cspmu *cspmu = to_arm_cspmu(event->pmu);
>  
>  	if (supports_cycle_counter(cspmu)) {
> @@ -587,6 +587,12 @@ static int arm_cspmu_get_event_idx(struct arm_cspmu_hw_events *hw_events,
>  	if (idx >= cspmu->num_logical_ctrs)
>  		return -EAGAIN;
>  
> +	if (cspmu->impl.ops.validate_event) {
> +		ret = cspmu->impl.ops.validate_event(cspmu, event);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
>  	set_bit(idx, hw_events->used_ctrs);
>  
>  	return idx;
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.h b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.h
> index d6d88c246a23..5070d34c2285 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.h
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.h
> @@ -104,6 +104,9 @@ struct arm_cspmu_impl_ops {
>  	/* Set event filter */
>  	void (*set_ev_filter)(struct arm_cspmu *cspmu,
>  			      struct hw_perf_event *hwc, u32 filter);
> +	/* Implementation specific event validation */
> +	int (*validate_event)(struct arm_cspmu *cspmu,
> +			      struct perf_event *event);
>  	/* Hide/show unsupported events */
>  	umode_t (*event_attr_is_visible)(struct kobject *kobj,
>  					 struct attribute *attr, int unused);