linux-kernel - Re: HW breakpoints perf

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]

Message-ID: <1263458665.4244.256.camel@laptop>
Date:	Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:44:25 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Joshua Pincus <joshua.pincus@...il.com>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	"K.Prasad" <prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, paulus@...ba.org,
	acme@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: HW breakpoints perf_events request

On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 17:45 -0800, Joshua Pincus wrote:
> However, there's nothing yet in place to allow a
> signal to be sent to the thread when a breakpoint
> has been hit.  Put another way, there's nothing here
> which affects execution flow of the user-app when the CPU
> traps due to a HW breakpoint.
> 
> Currently, the perf events infrastructure allows me
> to mmap() a block of memory and to poll() on it, waiting
> and watching for events to be described in that mmap'd
> buffer.  That will not be sufficient for what we need
> to do.  We need to have the ability to specify that
> execution of the thread should be interrupted, just as it
> would under ptrace(), and have a signal be delivered.
> Delivery of the signal must be received and processed
> by the application before the thread will be allowed to
> proceed to the nPC after the PC which caused the
> HW breakpoint event.
> 
> Is this possible?  Can we architect this feature into
> the perf_events infrastructure? 

We have fnctl() managing signal support, but that will only interrupt
the observing thread, not the threads being observed (unless they are
one and the same -- but using inheritance precludes that from being
true).

I'm not sure I'm willing to go in this direction with perf, the idea is
to have a minimum impact on the observed threads, explicitly sending
them signals and disturbing their execution goes against this.


--
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/