linux-kernel - [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Disable check

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190616141313.GD2500@krava>
Date:   Sun, 16 Jun 2019 16:13:13 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        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 <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Tom Vaden <tom.vaden@....com>
Subject: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Disable check_msr for real hw

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 09:45:21AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/14/2019 7:28 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > hi,
> > the HPE server can do POST tracing and have enabled LBR
> > tracing during the boot, which makes check_msr fail falsly.
> > 
> > It looks like check_msr code was added only to check on guests
> > MSR access, would it be then ok to disable check_msr for real
> > hardware? (as in patch below)
> 
> Yes, the check_msr patch was to fix a bug report in guest.
> I didn't get similar bug report for real hardware.
> I think it should be OK to disable it for real hardware.
> 

thanks for confirmation, attaching the full patch

thanks,
jirka


---
Tom Vaden reported false failure of check_msr function, because
some servers can do POST tracing and enable LBR tracing during
the boot.

Kan confirmed that check_msr patch was to fix a bug report in
guest, so it's ok to disable it for real HW.

Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
Reported-by: Tom Vaden <tom.vaden@....com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
---
 arch/x86/events/intel/core.c | 8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
index 71001f005bfe..1194ae7e1992 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
 #include <asm/intel-family.h>
 #include <asm/apic.h>
 #include <asm/cpu_device_id.h>
+#include <asm/hypervisor.h>
 
 #include "../perf_event.h"
 
@@ -4050,6 +4051,13 @@ static bool check_msr(unsigned long msr, u64 mask)
 {
 	u64 val_old, val_new, val_tmp;
 
+	/*
+	 * Disable the check for real HW, so we don't
+	 * mess up with potentionaly enabled regs.
+	 */
+	if (hypervisor_is_type(X86_HYPER_NATIVE))
+		return true;
+
 	/*
 	 * Read the current value, change it and read it back to see if it
 	 * matches, this is needed to detect certain hardware emulators
-- 
2.21.0