netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] perf: Add the flag sample_disable not to output data on samples

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: <561BA200.20108@huawei.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:05:20 +0800
From:	"Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@...wei.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Kaixu Xia <xiakaixu@...wei.com>
CC:	<ast@...mgrid.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <acme@...nel.org>,
	<mingo@...hat.com>, <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	<jolsa@...nel.org>, <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <pi3orama@....com>,
	<hekuang@...wei.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] perf: Add the flag sample_disable not to output
 data on samples



On 2015/10/12 20:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 09:02:42AM +0000, Kaixu Xia wrote:
>> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>> @@ -483,6 +483,8 @@ struct perf_event {
>>   	perf_overflow_handler_t		overflow_handler;
>>   	void				*overflow_handler_context;
>>   
>> +	atomic_t			*sample_disable;
>> +
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING
>>   	struct trace_event_call		*tp_event;
>>   	struct event_filter		*filter;
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index b11756f..f6ef45c 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -6337,6 +6337,9 @@ static int __perf_event_overflow(struct perf_event *event,
>>   		irq_work_queue(&event->pending);
>>   	}
>>   
>> +	if ((event->sample_disable) && atomic_read(event->sample_disable))
>> +		return ret;
>> +
>>   	if (event->overflow_handler)
>>   		event->overflow_handler(event, data, regs);
>>   	else
> Try and guarantee sample_disable lives in the same cacheline as
> overflow_handler.

Could you please explain why we need them to be in a same cacheline?

Thank you.

> I think we should at the very least replace the kzalloc() currently used
> with a cacheline aligned alloc, and check the structure layout to verify
> these two do in fact share a cacheline.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html