linux-kernel - Re: Fixing perf top --user shortcoming was: Re: [GIT PULL 0/9] perf/core improvements and fixes

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:	Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:32:23 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Fixing perf top --user shortcoming was: Re: [GIT PULL 0/9]
 perf/core improvements and fixes


* Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org> wrote:

> > > ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_READ) fails for some 
> > > tasks owned by the user because, IIRC, in 
> > > __ptrace_may_access:
> 
> > Which tasks are these, are they privileged in any sense?
> 
> IIRC one of them was a child of sshd, that runs as root and 
> then changes the child ownership to the user logging in.

It's probably privileged then - or at least not sufficiently 
deprivileged.

Skipping them ought to be the right solution - it's not like 
such tasks tend to create a lot of overhead worth profiling. 
They are also not debuggable via gdb so they are not part of the 
user's development session and such.

> I'll continue investigation but probably for now the first 
> thing to do is to just remove them from the thread_map when 
> they return -EPERM.

Yeah. Maybe warn about them in verbose mode or such.

> > If yes and if most of the 'real' tasks a user have can be 
> > profiled just fine then i think we should just skip the 
> > privileged tasks and not abort the profiling session?
> 
> Yeah, that can be done, while debugging I'll emit a warning 
> with the resulting thread_map of "special tasks" to figure out 
> what makes them special.

Ok, sounds great!

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/