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: <20150416163653.GC19775@leverpostej>
Date:	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 17:36:53 +0100
From:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
Cc:	"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
	"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>,
	"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 6/6] perf/x86/intel/uncore: do not implicitly set
 uncore event cpu

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:56:16AM +0100, Kan Liang wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> 
> There is cpumask exposed to the uncore pmu sysfs directory. User should
> set the cpu according to the cpumask. Kernel should not implicitly
> change the event->cpu.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> index c635b8b..cd80731 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> @@ -621,9 +621,8 @@ static int uncore_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
>  	if (event->cpu < 0)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	box = uncore_pmu_to_box(pmu, event->cpu);
> -	if (!box || box->cpu < 0)
> +	if (!box || box->cpu < 0 || (box->cpu != event->cpu))
>  		return -EINVAL;
> -	event->cpu = box->cpu;

There are no existing users relying on this behaviour?

If hotplug occurs between userspace reading the mask and trying to open
the event, it will get -EINVAL back, for no apparent reason, where
previously it would have been silently fixed up. Given the event
migration logic, the old behaviour was more consistent in allowing the
user to not care about hotplug.

Mark.
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ