linux-kernel - [PATCH] perf: Fix exit() vs PERF_FORMAT

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1273571513.5605.3527.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 11 May 2010 11:51:53 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Corey J Ashford <cjashfor@...ibm.com>,
	stephane eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] perf: Fix exit() vs PERF_FORMAT_GROUP -v2

Both Stephane and Corey reported that PERF_FORMAT_GROUP didn't work
as expected if the task the counters were attached to quit before
the read() call.
    
The cause is that we unconditionally destroy the grouping when we
remove counters from their context. Fix this by splitting off the group
destroy from the list removal such that perf_event_remove_from_context()
does not do this and change perf_event_release() to do so.

Reported-by: Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reported-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
---
 kernel/perf_event.c |   19 ++++++++++++++++---
 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/perf_event.c b/kernel/perf_event.c
index a904746..c97e825 100644
--- a/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -308,8 +308,6 @@ list_add_event(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 static void
 list_del_event(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 {
-	struct perf_event *sibling, *tmp;
-
 	if (list_empty(&event->group_entry))
 		return;
 	ctx->nr_events--;
@@ -333,6 +331,12 @@ list_del_event(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 	 */
 	if (event->state > PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF)
 		event->state = PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF;
+}
+
+static void
+perf_destroy_group(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
+{
+	struct perf_event *sibling, *tmp;
 
 	/*
 	 * If this was a group event with sibling events then
@@ -1868,6 +1872,12 @@ int perf_event_release_kernel(struct perf_event *event)
 {
 	struct perf_event_context *ctx = event->ctx;
 
+	/*
+	 * Remove from the PMU, can't get re-enabled since we got
+	 * here because the last ref went.
+	 */
+	perf_event_disable(event);
+
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(ctx->parent_ctx);
 	/*
 	 * There are two ways this annotation is useful:
@@ -1882,7 +1892,10 @@ int perf_event_release_kernel(struct perf_event *event)
 	 *     to trigger the AB-BA case.
 	 */
 	mutex_lock_nested(&ctx->mutex, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
-	perf_event_remove_from_context(event);
+	raw_spin_lock_irq(&ctx->lock);
+	list_del_event(event, ctx);
+	perf_destroy_group(event, ctx);
+	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->lock);
 	mutex_unlock(&ctx->mutex);
 
 	mutex_lock(&event->owner->perf_event_mutex);

--
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/