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:	Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:35:42 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <>
To:	Jiri Olsa <>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <>,,
	Alexander Yarygin <>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <>,
	Corey Ashford <>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Paul Mackerras <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] perf: Destroy event's children on task exit

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 03:22:23PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > if we dont do it, the event stays installed without owner and
> > > perf fork callback will be called and fail on permission checking
> > > (because of owner == NULL) ... so yes, I think it's needed
> > 
> > Oh, right. Alternatively, we don't need permission checking for inherits
> > at all, if we're allowed to create the initial event, we should be good
> > for inherits.
> I could adress that in follow up patch.. or you want this instead
> of this one? IMO we should close those events anyway..

I tend to agree that closing them all is nicer. But we need to be
careful while doing it so as not to make the clone/fork path block on

I _think_ it might be best to separate these two issues for the moment,
so cure the reported problem by avoiding the permission check for
inherited events -- IFF you agree with the previous argument that
install_exec_creds() should be sufficient.

And then so a patch playing games with perf_event_init_context()
(clone/fork) vs perf_event_exit_task() (exit).

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists