linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 8/8] perf/x86: Add event owner check when PEBS output to Intel PT

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, 29 Oct 2019 16:13:02 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Luwei Kang <luwei.kang@...el.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
        wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
        x86@...nel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        acme@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...hat.com,
        namhyung@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/8] perf/x86: Add event owner check when PEBS output
 to Intel PT

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 07:11:17PM -0400, Luwei Kang wrote:
> For PEBS output to Intel PT, a Intel PT event should be the group
> leader of an PEBS counter event in host. For Intel PT
> virtualization enabling in KVM guest, the PT facilities will be
> passthrough to guest and do not allocate PT event from host perf
> event framework. This is different with PMU virtualization.
> 
> Intel new hardware feature that can make PEBS enabled in KVM guest
> by output PEBS records to Intel PT buffer. KVM need to allocate
> a event counter for this PEBS event without Intel PT event leader.
> 
> This patch add event owner check for PEBS output to PT event that
> only non-kernel event need group leader(PT).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luwei Kang <luwei.kang@...el.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/events/core.c     | 3 ++-
>  include/linux/perf_event.h | 1 +
>  kernel/events/core.c       | 2 +-
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
> index 7b21455..214041a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/core.c
> @@ -1014,7 +1014,8 @@ static int collect_events(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc, struct perf_event *leader,
>  		 * away, the group was broken down and this singleton event
>  		 * can't schedule any more.
>  		 */
> -		if (is_pebs_pt(leader) && !leader->aux_event)
> +		if (is_pebs_pt(leader) && !leader->aux_event &&
> +					!is_kernel_event(leader))

indent fail, but also, I'm not sure I buy this.

Surely pt-on-kvm has a perf event to claim PT for the vCPU context?

Even if not, this is not strictly correct. Not even now is KVM the sole
user of perf_event_create_kernel_counter(), so saying any kernel event
is excempt from this scheduling constraint is jsut wrong.

>  			return -EINVAL;
>  
>  		/*