[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170628174900.GG8252@leverpostej>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:49:01 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc: "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, acme@...nel.org,
jolsa@...nel.org, kan.liang@...el.com,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
Robert O'Callahan <robert@...llahan.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/core: generate overflow signal when samples are
dropped (WAS: Re: [REGRESSION] perf/core: PMU interrupts dropped if we
entered the kernel in the "skid" region)
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 09:48:27AM -0700, Kyle Huey wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> > @@ -6101,6 +6116,12 @@ void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> > struct perf_output_handle handle;
> > struct perf_event_header header;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * For security, drop the skid kernel samples if necessary.
> > + */
> > + if (!sample_is_allowed(event, regs))
> > + return ret;
>
> Just a bare return here.
Ugh, yes. Sorry about that. I'll fix that up.
[...]
> I can confirm that with that fixed to compile, this patch fixes rr.
Thanks for giving this a go.
Having thought about this some more, I think Vince does make a good
point that throwing away samples is liable to break stuff, e.g. that
which only relies on (non-sensitive) samples.
It still seems wrong to make up data, though.
Maybe for exclude_kernel && !exclude_user events we can always generate
samples from the user regs, rather than the exception regs. That's going
to be closer to what the user wants, regardless. I'll take a look
tomorrow.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists