[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171127173417.eokpkznt65yreoav@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 18:34:17 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Milind Chabbi <chabbi.milind@...il.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <onestero@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoint: Factor out
__modify_user_hw_breakpoint function
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 06:25:32PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 06:12:03PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > But what validates the input attr is the same as the event attr, aside
> > from those fields?
>
> we don't.. the attr serves as a holder to carry those fields
> into the function
Then that's a straight up bug.
> the current kernel interface does not check anything else
Not enough, if the new attr would fail perf_event_open() it should also
fail this modify thing.
> there's one more check in the ioctl path, we check the
> type in perf_event_modify_attr:
>
> if (event->attr.type != attr->type)
> return -EINVAL;
Note how hw_breakpoint_event_init() tests has_branch_stack() and fails
on it.
Ideally we should check a whole lot more and fail, but alas..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists