linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v18 8/8] perf test: Add test for Intel TPEBS counting mode

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: <Zrunkf8jyqummurt@x1>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:36:01 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc: "Wang, Weilin" <weilin.wang@...el.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Taylor, Perry" <perry.taylor@...el.com>,
	"Alt, Samantha" <samantha.alt@...el.com>,
	"Biggers, Caleb" <caleb.biggers@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v18 8/8] perf test: Add test for Intel TPEBS counting
 mode

On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 03:27:39PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:48:21AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:18 AM Wang, Weilin <weilin.wang@...el.com> wrote:
> > > I just checkout the code and tested it. The failure is caused by a seg fault on a
> > > perf_tool struct that is not initialized correctly. I think this is related to the patches
> > > on struct perf_tool in this branch that applied right before the tpebs patches.
> 
> > > I was able to fix the seg fault by adding the perf_tool__fill_defaults() back. Since
> > > Ian updated the code to replace this function, I think I need some advice on how
> > > to use the new code to initialize perf_tool correctly here. Should I call the
> > > perf_tool__init()?
>  
> > Yep. If you've added or refactored a tool struct the intent now is
> > that you call perf_tool__init then override the functions you want to
> > override. I don't mind to rebase those changes over your changes,
> > Arnaldo if you want to drop those changes.
> 
> So I'm adding the patch below, which should be enough, right?

Everything is in tmp.perf-tools-next, will move to perf-tools-next at
the end of the day/early tomorrow, after the container build tests
finish.

- Arnaldo