linux-kernel - [PATCH] perf_counter: Report the cloning task as parent on perf_counter

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]

Date:	Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:14:42 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	paulus@...ba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: [PATCH] perf_counter: Report the cloning task as parent on
 perf_counter_fork()

A bug in (9f498cc: perf_counter: Full task tracing) makes profiling
multi-threaded apps it go belly up.

[ output as: (PID:TID):(PPID:PTID) ]

# ./perf report -D | grep FORK
0x4b0 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (3237:3237):(3236:3236)
0xa10 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (3237:3238):(3236:3236)
0xa70 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (3237:3239):(3236:3236)
0xad0 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (3237:3240):(3236:3236)
0xb18 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (3237:3241):(3236:3236)

Shows us that the test (27d028d perf report: Update for the new
FORK/EXIT events) in builtin-report.c:

        /*
         * A thread clone will have the same PID for both
         * parent and child.
         */
        if (thread == parent)
                return 0;

Will clearly fail.

The problem is that perf_counter_fork() reports the actual parent,
instead of the cloning thread.

Fixing that (with the below patch), yields:

# ./perf report -D | grep FORK
0x4c8 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (1590:1590):(1589:1589)
0xbd8 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (1590:1591):(1590:1590)
0xc80 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (1590:1592):(1590:1590)
0x3338 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (1590:1593):(1590:1590)
0x66b0 [0x18]: PERF_EVENT_FORK: (1590:1594):(1590:1590)

Which both makes more sense and doesn't confuse perf report anymore.

Reported-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
---
 perf_counter.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/kernel/perf_counter.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/perf_counter.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/perf_counter.c
@@ -3024,10 +3024,10 @@ static void perf_counter_task_output(str
 		return;
 
 	task_event->event.pid = perf_counter_pid(counter, task);
-	task_event->event.ppid = perf_counter_pid(counter, task->real_parent);
+	task_event->event.ppid = perf_counter_pid(counter, current);
 
 	task_event->event.tid = perf_counter_tid(counter, task);
-	task_event->event.ptid = perf_counter_tid(counter, task->real_parent);
+	task_event->event.ptid = perf_counter_tid(counter, current);
 
 	perf_output_put(&handle, task_event->event);
 	perf_output_end(&handle);

--
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/