linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: catch spurious interrupts after disabling counters

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:	Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:14:58 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	"gorcunov@...il.com" <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	"fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ying.huang@...el.com" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"ming.m.lin@...el.com" <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	"yinghai@...nel.org" <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: catch spurious interrupts after disabling
 counters

On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 10:51 +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 16.09.10 13:34:40, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 18:20 +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> > > Some cpus still deliver spurious interrupts after disabling a counter.
> > > This caused 'undelivered NMI' messages. This patch fixes this.
> > > 
> > I tried the below and that also seems to work.. So yeah, looks like
> > we're getting late NMIs.
> 
> I would rather prefer the fix I sent. This patch does a rdmsrl() with
> each nmi on every inactive counter.

Sure, I was just playing around trying to see if that was indeed the
problem.

>  It also changes the counter value
> of all inactive counters, thus restarting a counter by only setting
> the enable bit may start with an unexpected counter value (didn't look
> at current implementation if this could be a problem).

It actually would, pmu->stop()/->start() won't save/restore the counter
value unless you add PERF_EF_UPDATE/PERF_EF_RELOAD.

> It is also not possible to detect with hardware, which counter fired
> the interrupt. We cannot assume a counter overflowed by just reading
> the upper bit of the counter value. We must track this in software. 

Well, exactly that seemed sufficient to not get spurious NMIs.


--
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/