[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111223105608.GH4749@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:56:08 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Benjamin Block <bebl@...eta.org>,
Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@....com>, hpa@...or.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, eranian@...gle.com,
brgerst@...il.com, Andreas.Herrmann3@....com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Block <benjamin.block@....com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] x86, perf: implements lwp-perf-integration (rc1)
* Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:40:04PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > The point is, if user-space re-programs LWP it will continue
> > > to write its samples to the new ring-buffer virtual-address
> > > set up by user-space. It will still use that virtual address
> > > in another address-space after a task-switch. This allows
> > > processes to corrupt memory of other processes. [...]
> >
> > That's nonsense. As i said it my previous mail the LWPC
> > should be per task and switched on task switch - just like
> > the DS/PEBS context is.
>
> Is it? Looking at arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_ds.c it
> seems like DS is per cpu, not per task.
We flush it on context switch and reuse it for the next task via
the x86_pmu.drain_pebs() callback - so the buffering of PEBS
events is per task.
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