| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CABPqkBRsBegm6gv6agHcGb0Hh1EWCV5gjVnbbwPHh-eOfROCuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 13:16:44 +0200
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: acme@...hat.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mingo@...e.hu,
paulus@...ba.org, cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
gorcunov@...nvz.org, tzanussi@...il.com, mhiramat@...hat.com,
robert.richter@....com, fche@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com,
drepper@...il.com, asharma@...com, benjamin.redelings@...cent.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/19] perf: Add ability to attach user level registers
dump to sample
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> Introducing sample_regs_user bitmask into perf_event_attr
> struct to define the user level registers we want to attach
> to the sample. The dump itself is triggered once the
> sample_regs_user is not empty.
>
> Only user level registers are dump at the moment. Meaning the
> register values of the user space context as it was before the
> user entered the kernel for whatever reason (syscall, irq,
> exception, or a PMI happening in userspace).
>
> The layout of the sample_regs_user bitmap is described in
> asm/perf_regs.h for archs that support register dump.
>
> This is going to be useful to bring Dwarf CFI based stack
> unwinding on top of samples.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 10 ++++++-
> kernel/events/core.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 1ce887a..d66cbeb 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -271,7 +271,13 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
> __u64 bp_len;
> __u64 config2; /* extension of config1 */
> };
> - __u64 branch_sample_type; /* enum branch_sample_type */
> + __u64 branch_sample_type; /* enum perf_branch_sample_type */
> +
> + /*
> + * Defines set of user regs to dump on samples.
> + * See asm/perf_regs.h for details.
> + */
> + __u64 sample_regs_user;
> };
That's not enough. You also need to define PERF_SAMPLE_USER_REGS
for sample_type. Although the sample_regs_users might look like it's enough
to capture regs, there is a problem when it comes to parsing the record. You
need an ordering guarantee that is explicitly spelled out in the API (the header
file). In your current patch, I have no way of knowing that sample_regs_users
are saved after BRANCH_STACK (should you have that enabled). Remember
that you can turn on/off sampled infos at will in sample_type. Yet to find the
infos when parsing, you need to know the order.
The enum perf_event_sample_format provides that ordering information. You
need to add a new type for sampling user regs.
>
> /*
> @@ -609,6 +615,7 @@ struct perf_guest_info_callbacks {
> #include <linux/static_key.h>
> #include <linux/atomic.h>
> #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/perf_regs.h>
> #include <asm/local.h>
>
> struct perf_callchain_entry {
> @@ -1131,6 +1138,7 @@ struct perf_sample_data {
> struct perf_callchain_entry *callchain;
> struct perf_raw_record *raw;
> struct perf_branch_stack *br_stack;
> + struct pt_regs *regs_user;
> };
>
> static inline void perf_sample_data_init(struct perf_sample_data *data,
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index f85c015..e4df59d 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -3750,6 +3750,33 @@ int perf_unregister_guest_info_callbacks(struct perf_guest_info_callbacks *cbs)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_unregister_guest_info_callbacks);
>
> +static void
> +perf_output_sample_regs(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> + struct pt_regs *regs, u64 mask)
> +{
> + int bit;
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(bit, (const unsigned long *) &mask,
> + sizeof(mask) * BITS_PER_BYTE) {
> + u64 val;
> +
> + val = perf_reg_value(regs, bit);
> + perf_output_put(handle, val);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static struct pt_regs *perf_sample_regs_user(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + if (!user_mode(regs)) {
> + if (current->mm)
> + regs = task_pt_regs(current);
> + else
> + regs = NULL;
> + }
> +
> + return regs;
> +}
> +
> static void __perf_event_header__init_id(struct perf_event_header *header,
> struct perf_sample_data *data,
> struct perf_event *event)
> @@ -4010,6 +4037,23 @@ void perf_output_sample(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> perf_output_put(handle, nr);
> }
> }
> +
> + if (event->attr.sample_regs_user) {
> + u64 avail = (data->regs_user != NULL);
> +
> + /*
> + * If there are no regs to dump, notice it through
> + * first u64 being zero.
> + */
> + perf_output_put(handle, avail);
> +
> + if (avail) {
> + u64 mask = event->attr.sample_regs_user;
> + perf_output_sample_regs(handle,
> + data->regs_user,
> + mask);
> + }
> + }
> }
>
> void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> @@ -4061,6 +4105,19 @@ void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> }
> header->size += size;
> }
> +
> + if (event->attr.sample_regs_user) {
> + /* regs dump available bool */
> + int size = sizeof(u64);
> +
> + data->regs_user = perf_sample_regs_user(regs);
> + if (data->regs_user) {
> + u64 mask = event->attr.sample_regs_user;
> + size += hweight64(mask) * sizeof(u64);
> + }
> +
> + header->size += size;
> + }
> }
>
> static void perf_event_output(struct perf_event *event,
> @@ -6110,6 +6167,10 @@ static int perf_copy_attr(struct perf_event_attr __user *uattr,
> attr->branch_sample_type = mask;
> }
> }
> +
> + if (attr->sample_regs_user)
> + ret = perf_reg_validate(attr->sample_regs_user);
> +
> out:
> return ret;
>
> --
> 1.7.7.6
>
--
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