linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v5 07/19] perf: Add sampling support for SIMD registers

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: <2c057288-afe9-4117-8db3-5211fb82615c@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2025 14:00:45 +0800
From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
 <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
 Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Eranian Stephane <eranian@...gle.com>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, broonie@...nel.org,
 Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, Zide Chen <zide.chen@...el.com>,
 Falcon Thomas <thomas.falcon@...el.com>, Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...el.com>,
 Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@...el.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v5 07/19] perf: Add sampling support for SIMD registers


On 12/5/2025 7:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 02:54:48PM +0800, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index 3e9c48fa2202..b19de038979e 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -7469,6 +7469,50 @@ perf_output_sample_regs(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void
>> +perf_output_sample_simd_regs(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
>> +			     struct perf_event *event,
>> +			     struct pt_regs *regs,
>> +			     u64 mask, u16 pred_mask)
>> +{
>> +	u16 pred_qwords = event->attr.sample_simd_pred_reg_qwords;
>> +	u16 vec_qwords = event->attr.sample_simd_vec_reg_qwords;
>> +	u64 pred_bitmap = pred_mask;
>> +	u64 bitmap = mask;
>> +	u16 nr_vectors;
>> +	u16 nr_pred;
>> +	int bit;
>> +	u64 val;
>> +	u16 i;
>> +
>> +	nr_vectors = hweight64(bitmap);
>> +	nr_pred = hweight64(pred_bitmap);
>> +
>> +	perf_output_put(handle, nr_vectors);
>> +	perf_output_put(handle, vec_qwords);
>> +	perf_output_put(handle, nr_pred);
>> +	perf_output_put(handle, pred_qwords);
>> +
>> +	if (nr_vectors) {
>> +		for_each_set_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&bitmap,
> This isn't right. Yes we do this all the time in the x86 code, but there
> we can assume little-endian byte order. This is core code and is also
> used on big-endian systems where this is very much broken.

Oh, yes. Just ignored the endians. Would fix it in next version. Thanks.


>
>> +				 sizeof(bitmap) * BITS_PER_BYTE) {
>> +			for (i = 0; i < vec_qwords; i++) {
>> +				val = perf_simd_reg_value(regs, bit, i, false);
>> +				perf_output_put(handle, val);
>> +			}
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +	if (nr_pred) {
>> +		for_each_set_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&pred_bitmap,
>> +				 sizeof(pred_bitmap) * BITS_PER_BYTE) {
>> +			for (i = 0; i < pred_qwords; i++) {
>> +				val = perf_simd_reg_value(regs, bit, i, true);
>> +				perf_output_put(handle, val);
>> +			}
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +}