linux-kernel - Re: I.5 - Mmaped count

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: <20090622115239.GF24366@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:52:39 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	eranian@...il.com
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Maynard Johnson <mpjohn@...ibm.com>,
	Carl Love <cel@...ibm.com>,
	Corey J Ashford <cjashfor@...ibm.com>,
	Philip Mucci <mucci@...s.utk.edu>,
	Dan Terpstra <terpstra@...s.utk.edu>,
	perfmon2-devel <perfmon2-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: I.5 - Mmaped count

> 5/ Mmaped count
>
> It is possible to read counts directly from user space for
> self-monitoring threads. This leverages a HW capability present on
> some processors. On X86, this is possible via RDPMC.
>
> The full 64-bit count is constructed by combining the hardware
> value extracted with an assembly instruction and a base value made
> available thru the mmap. There is an atomic generation count
> available to deal with the race condition.
>
> I believe there is a problem with this approach given that the PMU
> is shared and that events can be multiplexed. That means that even
> though you are self-monitoring, events get replaced on the PMU.
> The assembly instruction is unaware of that, it reads a register
> not an event.
>
> On x86, assume event A is hosted in counter 0, thus you need
> RDPMC(0) to extract the count. But then, the event is replaced by
> another one which reuses counter 0. At the user level, you will
> still use RDPMC(0) but it will read the HW value from a different
> event and combine it with a base count from another one.
>
> To avoid this, you need to pin the event so it stays in the PMU at
> all times. Now, here is something unclear to me. Pinning does not
> mean stay in the SAME register, it means the event stays on the
> PMU but it can possibly change register. To prevent that, I
> believe you need to also set exclusive so that no other group can
> be scheduled, and thus possibly use the same counter.
>
> Looks like this is the only way you can make this actually work.
> Not setting pinned+exclusive, is another pitfall in which many
> people will fall into.

   do {
     seq = pc->lock;

     barrier()
     if (pc->index) {
       count = pmc_read(pc->index - 1);
       count += pc->offset;
     } else
       goto regular_read;

     barrier();
   } while (pc->lock != seq);

We don't see the hole you are referring to. The sequence lock
ensures you get a consistent view.
--
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/