linux-kernel - Re: perf: fuzzer causes lockup in x86_pmu_event

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: <20150317135536.GA14587@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:55:36 +0100
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: perf: fuzzer causes lockup in x86_pmu_event_init()

On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 02:13:25PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> 
> > hum, I dont see the locking is a problem.. but looks like once
> > the sibling becomes singleton event, we dont init its sibling_list
> > 
> > how about patch below.. compile tested ;-)
> 
> so this is instead of PeterZ's patch?
> 
> I'll start my test-machine fuzzing with this plus the infinite-interrupt 
> fix and see what happens.  The machines do eventually trigger the issue
> somwhat consistently but it can take up to a week before they hit it
> so it's a tough one to test for.

I guess no news is good news in here..  ;-)

Peter, should I repost formal patch or you'll take it somehow

thanks,
jirka
--
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/