linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: perf: Count EL2 events if either of kernel and hyp are not excluded

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:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 13:26:32 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:     Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@...il.com>
Cc:     Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, jnair@...iumnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: perf: Count EL2 events if either of kernel and
 hyp are not excluded

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 05:37:10PM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 04:10:55PM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> >> commit d98ecda (arm64: perf: Count EL2 events if the kernel is running in HYP)
> >> is returning error for perf syscall with mixed attribute set for exclude_kernel
> >> and exlude_hv.
> >>
> >> This change is breaking some applications (observed with hhvm) when
> >> ran with VHE enabled. Adding change to enable EL2 event counting,
> >> if either of or both of exclude_kernel and exlude_hv are not set.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
> >>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Hmm. When we have VHE, we can't distinguish between hypervisor and kernel,
> > so this patch doesn't seem right to me. The code currently requires
> > both exclude_kernel and exclude_hv to be clear before we enable profiling
> > EL2, otherwise we're failing to exclude samples that were asked to be
> > excluded.
> 
> The application cant differentiate that kernel is running in EL2/VHE or in EL1
> when VHE=1, is it makes sense to enable EL2 event counting when there
> is request from application to either include kernel or hypervisor
> event count, since both are same.

You can make exactly the same argument against your proposal by saying that
it makes sense to disable EL2 event counting when there is a request from
an application to either exclude kernel or hypervisor event counting.

> IMO, it is not appropriate to have different application behaviour
> when kernel booted with VHE=0/1

Then find another solution to that. How about a mechanism to advertise
that exclude_hv is effectively always set if the kernel is running at EL2?

That would mean that you would use exclude_kernel to determine the profiling
controls for the host.

Will