linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf list: Fix the --no-desc option

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: Mon, 13 May 2024 18:07:53 +0100
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, leit@...a.com,
	"open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf list: Fix the --no-desc option

On Sat, May 11, 2024 at 02:25:53PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> With Breno's patch the default doesn't change, --no-desc gets fixed but
> --long-desc is broken:
> 
> perf list --long-desc
> <SNIP>
> cache:
>   longest_lat_cache.miss
>        [Counts the number of cacheable memory requests that miss in the LLC. Counts on a per core basis. Unit: cpu_atom]
>        [Counts the number of cacheable memory requests that miss in the Last Level Cache (LLC). Requests include demand loads,reads for ownership (RFO),instruction fetches and L1 HW
>         prefetches. If the platform has an L3 cache,the LLC is the L3 cache,otherwise it is the L2 cache. Counts on a per core basis]
> <SNIP>

Oh, both descriptions (long and "short") are being displayed. 

> Thanks for asking the question, I'm dropping the patch, Breno, can you
> try again?

Sure, let me think about it and send a v2.

Thanks!