linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 5/5] x86,perf: Only allow rdpmc if a perf

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]

Message-ID: <20141019222004.GI23531@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 00:20:04 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Erik Bosman <ebn310@....vu.nl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] x86,perf: Only allow rdpmc if a perf_event is mapped

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 03:05:42PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2014 2:33 PM, "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> > > Also, I don't understand the purpose of cap_user_time.  Wouldn't it be
> > > easier to just record the last CLOCK_MONOTONIC time and let the user
> > > call __vdso_clock_gettime if they need an updated time?
> >
> > Because perf doesn't use CLOCK_MONOTONIC. Due to performance
> > considerations we used the sched_clock stuff, which tries its best to
> > make the best of the TSC without reverting to HPET and the like.
> >
> > Not to mention that CLOCK_MONOTONIC was not available from NMI context
> > until very recently.
> 
> I'm only talking about the userspace access to when an event was
> enabled and how long it's been running.  I think that's what the
> cap_user_time stuff is for.  I don't think those parameters are
> touched from NMI, right?
> 
> Point taken about sched_clock, though.

Well, mixing two time bases, one TSC based and one CLOCK_MONOTONIC is
just asking for trouble IMO ;-)

> > Also, things like c73deb6aecda ("perf/x86: Add ability to calculate TSC
> > from perf sample timestamps") seem to suggest people actually use TSC
> > for things as well.
> >
> > Now we might change to using the new NMI safe CLOCK_MONOTONIC (with a
> > fallback to use the sched_clock stuff on time challenged hardware) in
> > order to ease the correlation between other trace thingies, but even
> > then it makes sense to have this, having it here and reading the TSC
> > within the seqcount loop ensures you've got consistent data and touch
> > less cachelines for reading.
> 
> True.
> 
> OTOH, people (i.e. I) have optimized the crap out of
> __vdso_clock_gettime, and __vdso_perf_event_whatever could be
> similarly optimized.

Maybe, but at that point we commit to yet another ABI... I'd rather just
put a 'sane' implementation in a library or so.
--
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/