linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 0/4] perf arm-spe: Allow synthesizing of branch instructions

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: <1e115332-f68f-479a-8ae9-6b9a3120b21c@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 14:08:09 +0100
From: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
To: Graham Woodward <graham.woodward@....com>
Cc: nd@....com, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
 jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, mike.leach@...aro.org,
 leo.yan@...ux.dev, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/4] perf arm-spe: Allow synthesizing of branch
 instructions



On 25/10/2024 11:52 am, Graham Woodward wrote:
> Currently the --itrace=b will only show branch-misses but this change
> allows perf to synthesize branches as well.
> 
> The change also incorporates the ability to display the target
> addresses when specifying the addr field if the instruction is a branch.
> 
> Graham Woodward (4):
>    perf arm-spe: Set sample.addr to target address for instruction sample
>    perf arm-spe: Use ARM_SPE_OP_BRANCH_ERET when synthesizing branches
>    perf arm-spe: Correctly set sample flags
>    perf arm-spe: Update --itrace help text
> 
>   tools/perf/Documentation/itrace.txt       |  2 +-
>   tools/perf/Documentation/perf-arm-spe.txt |  2 +-
>   tools/perf/builtin-script.c               |  1 +
>   tools/perf/util/arm-spe.c                 | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>   tools/perf/util/auxtrace.h                |  3 +--
>   tools/perf/util/event.h                   |  1 +
>   6 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 

Hi Graham,

I think this is V1? Also it looks like the base doesn't include a few of 
the new SPE changes and it doesn't apply cleanly. Make sure it's based 
of the latest (46610ba41ef1)

With that LGTM:

Reviewed-by: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>