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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 17 Aug 2009 19:26:38 +1000
From:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_counter: Check task on counter read IPI

Peter Zijlstra writes:

> > I don't have an example of an actual failure due to this race, but it
> > seems obvious that it could occur and we need to guard against it, so
> > I think this should go in .31.
> 
> Hmm, right.
> 
> However those other sites have retry loops in the caller, but callers of
> __perf_counter_read() do not. Granted, I'm not sure what they should
> retry on exactly, but this patch trades an invalid update to a missing
> update.

It relies on the counter sched-out updating ->count for all the
counters on the task.  We know that the sched-out happened very
recently, i.e. in the interval between deciding to send the IPI and
the IPI arriving.  So the counter value should be sufficiently up to
date.  Ingo pointed this out to me some time ago.

I tried to address that in the comments and the patch description but
perhaps I wasn't explicit enough.

Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ