linux-kernel - Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET

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:	Wed, 2 Oct 2013 14:29:01 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
	"Shishkin, Alexander" <alexander.shishkin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_OUTPUT


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:29:56PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:03:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:11:56PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > > 
> > > > It does not seem possible to use set-output between
> > > > task contexts of different types (e.g. a software event
> > > > to a hardware event)
> > > > 
> > > > If you look at perf_event_set_output():
> > > > 
> > > >           /*
> > > >            * If its not a per-cpu rb, it must be the same task.
> > > >            */
> > > >           if (output_event->cpu == -1 && output_event->ctx != event->ctx)
> > > >                   goto out;
> > > > 
> > > > ctx (perf_event_context) won't be the same for events
> > > > of different types.  Is this restriction necessary?
> > > 
> > > Hmm.. so last night I wrote me a big reply saying we couldn't do it;
> > > then this morning I reconsidered and thing that something like:
> > > 
> > >   output_event->ctx->task != event->ctx->task
> > > 
> > > should actually work.
> > > 
> > > The reason it should be OK I think is because perf_mmap() will refuse to
> > > create a buffer for inherited events that have ->cpu == -1.
> > > 
> > > My initial response was going to say that it wouldn't be possible
> > > because __perf_event_task_sched_out() could 'break' one ctx while still
> > > swapping the other, at which point the buffer would have to service two
> > > different tasks, potentially from different CPUs and with the buffers
> > > not actually being SMP safe that's a problem.
> > 
> > I don't get what you mean with breaking or swapping a ctx. But I can 
> > confirm that perf_mmap() won't allow a buffer to be remotely accessed 
> > from another CPU. Now there may be other issues than locality which 
> > I'm missing :)
> 
> The way we 'optimize' context switches between tasks with identical 
> contexts is to simply swap the context and leave the hardware alone.

Btw., this does not seem to be working very well when the perf context is 
inherited:

Baseline kernel with no perf context:

  aldebaran:~> taskset 1 perf stat --null perf bench sched pipe
  # Running sched/pipe benchmark...
  # Executed 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks

     Total time: 5.024 [sec]

       5.024951 usecs/op
         199006 ops/sec

with inherited perf contexts:

  aldebaran:~> taskset 1 perf stat perf bench sched pipe
  # Running sched/pipe benchmark...
  # Executed 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks

     Total time: 17.869 [sec]

      17.869061 usecs/op
          55962 ops/sec

+12.8 usecs of perf switching fat per context switch, on a non-debug 
kernel on a 2.8GHz CPU :-/

We should declare a hard feature stop until that is improved.

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/