linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/2] x86_64 page fault NMI-safe

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, 14 Jul 2010 19:11:17 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...tedt.homelinux.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] x86_64 page fault NMI-safe

* Frederic Weisbecker (fweisbec@...il.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 06:31:07PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Frederic Weisbecker (fweisbec@...il.com) wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:54:19PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Frederic Weisbecker
> > > > <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > There is also the fact we need to handle the lost NMI, by defering its
> > > > > treatment or so. That adds even more complexity.
> > > > 
> > > > I don't think your read my proposal very deeply. It already handles
> > > > them by taking a fault on the iret of the first one (that's why we
> > > > point to the stack frame - so that we can corrupt it and force a
> > > > fault).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ah right, I missed this part.
> > 
> > Hrm, Frederic, I hate to ask that but.. what are you doing with those percpu 8k
> > data structures exactly ? :)
> > 
> > Mathieu
> 
> 
> 
> So, when an event triggers in perf, we sometimes want to capture the stacktrace
> that led to the event.
> 
> We want this stacktrace (here we call that a callchain) to be recorded
> locklessly. So we want this callchain buffer per cpu, with the following
> type:

Ah OK, so you mean that perf now has 2 different ring buffer implementations ?
How about using a single one that is generic enough to handle perf and ftrace
needs instead ?

(/me runs away quickly before the lightning strikes) ;)

Mathieu


> 
> 	#define PERF_MAX_STACK_DEPTH		255
> 
> 	struct perf_callchain_entry {
> 		__u64				nr;
> 		__u64				ip[PERF_MAX_STACK_DEPTH];
> 	};
> 
> 
> That makes 2048 bytes. But per cpu is not enough for the callchain to be recorded
> locklessly, we also need one buffer per context: task, softirq, hardirq, nmi, as
> an event can trigger in any of these.
> Since we disable preemption, none of these contexts can nest locally. In
> fact hardirqs can nest but we just don't care about this corner case.
> 
> So, it makes 2048 * 4 = 8192 bytes. And that per cpu.
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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/