linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] perf/perf_events: misleading number of samples due to mmap()

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:	Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:41:03 +0200
From:	stephane eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, paulus@...ba.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, fweisbec@...il.com,
	perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf/perf_events: misleading number of samples due to 
	mmap()

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 16:40 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> This leads me to another point. For per-thread sampling, why
>> do we need to record mmap() events happening *outside* of
>> the process? I can understand the exception of kernel modules.
>
> How does that happen? The per-thread events should be on the per-task
> context, so another task's mmap() events should never end up there.
>

I don't see the test that says the vma does not belong to the current task.
I also don't see anything in perf_event_mmap_match().

It does seem to work as you said in recent kernels, though. So I am certainly
missing something here.
--
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/