linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/5] arm64: perf: Implement correct cap_user

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, 12 May 2020 14:41:00 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...hat.com,
        daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        sboyd@...eaurora.org, john.stultz@...aro.org,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] arm64: perf: Implement correct cap_user_time

As reported by Leo; the existing implementation is broken when the
clock and counter don't intersect at 0.

Use the sched_clock's struct clock_read_data information to correctly
implement cap_user_time and cap_user_time_zero.

Note that the ARM64 counter is architecturally only guaranteed to be
56bit wide (implementations are allowed to be wider) and the existing
perf ABI cannot deal with wrap-around.

This implementation should also be faster than the old; seeing how we
don't need to recompute mult and shift all the time.

Reported-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c |   36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include <linux/of.h>
 #include <linux/perf/arm_pmu.h>
 #include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/sched_clock.h>
 #include <linux/smp.h>
 
 /* ARMv8 Cortex-A53 specific event types. */
@@ -1165,28 +1166,45 @@ device_initcall(armv8_pmu_driver_init)
 void arch_perf_update_userpage(struct perf_event *event,
 			       struct perf_event_mmap_page *userpg, u64 now)
 {
-	u32 freq;
-	u32 shift;
+	struct clock_read_data *rd;
+	unsigned int seq;
 
 	/*
 	 * Internal timekeeping for enabled/running/stopped times
 	 * is always computed with the sched_clock.
 	 */
-	freq = arch_timer_get_rate();
 	userpg->cap_user_time = 1;
+	userpg->cap_user_time_zero = 1;
+
+	do {
+		rd = sched_clock_read_begin(&seq);
+
+		userpg->time_mult = rd->mult;
+		userpg->time_shift = rd->shift;
+		userpg->time_zero = rd->epoch_ns;
+
+		/*
+		 * This isn't strictly correct, the ARM64 counter can be
+		 * 'short' and then we get funnies when it wraps. The correct
+		 * thing would be to extend the perf ABI with a cycle and mask
+		 * value, but because wrapping on ARM64 is very rare in
+		 * practise this 'works'.
+		 */
+		userpg->time_zero -= (rd->epoch_cyc * rd->mult) >> rd->shift;
+
+	} while (sched_clock_read_retry(seq));
+
+	userpg->time_offset = userpg->time_zero - now;
 
-	clocks_calc_mult_shift(&userpg->time_mult, &shift, freq,
-			NSEC_PER_SEC, 0);
 	/*
 	 * time_shift is not expected to be greater than 31 due to
 	 * the original published conversion algorithm shifting a
 	 * 32-bit value (now specifies a 64-bit value) - refer
 	 * perf_event_mmap_page documentation in perf_event.h.
 	 */
-	if (shift == 32) {
-		shift = 31;
+	if (userpg->shift == 32) {
+		userpg->shift = 31;
 		userpg->time_mult >>= 1;
 	}
-	userpg->time_shift = (u16)shift;
-	userpg->time_offset = -now;
+
 }