linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: Disable perf if the BIOS got its grubby paws on the PMU

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]

Message-ID: <1283525163.2050.105.camel@laptop>
Date:	Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:46:03 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	"robert.richter" <robert.richter@....com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: Disable perf if the BIOS got its grubby
 paws on the PMU

On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 09:32 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:53:59AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 9/3/2010 2:13 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > >+static void print_BIOS_fail(void)
> > >+{
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "\n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "=============================================\n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "It appears the BIOS is actively using the PMU\n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "this avoids Linux from using it, please de-  \n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "activate this BIOS feature or request a BIOS \n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "update from your vendor.                     \n");
> > >+	printk(KERN_ERR "=============================================\n");
> > >+
> > >+	memset(&x86_pmu, 0, sizeof(x86_pmu));
> > >+}

> I must object to messages that repeatedly (at least on every boot)
> tell system administrators to contact their hardware vendor's support
> lines, when it's not clear what the BIOS is doing is incorrect. 

It is using the PMU, it should not _ever_ do that.

>  There
> are plenty of valid reasons why BIOS itself would use PMU counters.
> Dell PowerEdge server power management, handled by the BIOS, certainly
> does use one.

Them make them stop doing that, or at least provide a BIOS option to
disable this Feat^WFailure-add.

An no, doing power-management from the BIOS is most certainly not a
valid reason. That's not what BIOSes are for, a BIOS should bring up the
system and then sod off.

> My understanding is that there is a mechanism for the OS to request
> BIOS to release use of PMU counters.  Are we doing that?

I'm not aware of any such thing. The Intel Arch docs most certainly
don't specify anything about that.

>   If BIOS does
> not release the counters when asked, ok, that's something to
> (potentially) warn about.  But blanket "BIOS is using a CPU feature!
> Bad BIOS!  No treat for you!" - that's not helpful to anyone.

Again, I'm not aware there is a spec on how to ask anything of the BIOS,
let alone a part pertaining to PMU functionality.
--
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/