linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Prevent recursion in ring buffer

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: <20180913074042.GU24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Thu, 13 Sep 2018 09:40:42 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Prevent recursion in ring buffer

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 09:33:17PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:

>   # perf record -e 'sched:sched_switch,sched:sched_wakeup' perf bench sched messaging

> The reason for the corruptions are some of the scheduling tracepoints,
> that have __perf_task dfined and thus allow to store data to another
> cpu ring buffer:
> 
>   sched_waking
>   sched_wakeup
>   sched_wakeup_new
>   sched_stat_wait
>   sched_stat_sleep
>   sched_stat_iowait
>   sched_stat_blocked

> And then iterates events of the 'task' and store the sample
> for any task's event that passes tracepoint checks:
> 
>   ctx = rcu_dereference(task->perf_event_ctxp[perf_sw_context]);
> 
>   list_for_each_entry_rcu(event, &ctx->event_list, event_entry) {
>     if (event->attr.type != PERF_TYPE_TRACEPOINT)
>       continue;
>     if (event->attr.config != entry->type)
>       continue;
> 
>     perf_swevent_event(event, count, &data, regs);
>   }
> 
> Above code can race with same code running on another cpu,
> ending up with 2 cpus trying to store under the same ring
> buffer, which is not handled at the moment.

It can yes, however the only way I can see this breaking is if we use
!inherited events with a strict per-task buffer, but your record command
doesn't use that.

Now, your test-case uses inherited events, which would all share the
buffer, however IIRC inherited events require per-task-per-cpu buffers,
because there is already no guarantee the various tasks run on the same
CPU in the first place.

This means we _should_ write to the @task's local CPU buffer, and that
would work again.

Let me try and figure out where this is going wrong.