[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110512215023.GA20939@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 23:50:23 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] perf: bogus correlation of kernel symbols
* Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >
> > * Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The other contradiction, I see, is that you have perf_event paranoia level
> >> and this new kptr masquerading feature which conflict with each
> >> other.
> >>
> >> You can be allowed to monitor at the kernel level (paranoid=1, default)
> >> but you cannot correlate symbols:
> >>
> >> $ perf record -e cycles:k foo
> >>
> >> I suspect if you have this kptr thing turned on, then you need to disallow
> >> monitoring at the kernel level too.
> >
> > The better (and consistent) solution would be to turn the kptr_restrict thing
> > off - see the patch i sent.
>
> I saw that. But I think that when someone turns it back on, then you need to
> increase the perf_events paranoia level to disallow kernel monitoring to
> regular users such that you maintain consistency across the board.
Dunno, i would not couple them necessarily - certain users might still have
access to kernel symbols via some other channel - for example the System.map.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists