linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/28] Legacy hardware/cache events as json

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: <CAP-5=fX0bOj2kEJYmRs33RpL0ODaOy2wCvDzwLDmNxurVRpGew@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 13:10:58 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, 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>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Xu Yang <xu.yang_2@....com>, Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@...el.com>, 
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, Atish Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>, 
	Beeman Strong <beeman@...osinc.com>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>, 
	Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/28] Legacy hardware/cache events as json

On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 10:58 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
> From bisecting, this change came from commit 9eac5612da1c ("perf stat:
> Don't skip failing group events"):
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250825211204.2784695-3-irogers@google.com/
> Taking a look.

I sent a fix:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/20251002200604.1792141-2-irogers@google.com/
that makes it so that only if all events are unsupported that perf
stat exits - this is addressing a bunch of latent issues and fixes the
perf-tools-next regression. I don't think there is a difference
between v3 and v6 wrt this behavior, I think you were probably just
cherry-picking the v6 patches onto a newer tree. When those 2 patches
land I can rebase this series on them and drop the first patch of this
series.

Thanks,
Ian