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: <e7d236f7-61c2-731d-571b-839e0e545563@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:30:21 +0100
From:   Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, coresight@...ts.linaro.org,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/4] coresight: tmc-etf: Fix NULL ptr dereference in
 tmc_enable_etf_sink_perf()

On 10/22/20 12:32 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:27:52PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> 
>> Looking at the ETR and other places in the kernel, ETF and the
>> ETB are the only places trying to dereference the task(owner)
>> in tmc_enable_etf_sink_perf() which is also called from the
>> sched_in path as in the call trace.
> 
>> @@ -391,6 +392,10 @@ static void *tmc_alloc_etf_buffer(struct coresight_device *csdev,
>>   {
>>   	int node;
>>   	struct cs_buffers *buf;
>> +	struct task_struct *task = READ_ONCE(event->owner);
>> +
>> +	if (!task || is_kernel_event(event))
>> +		return NULL;
> 
> 
> This is *wrong*... why do you care about who owns the events?
> 

This is due to the special case of the CoreSight configuration, where
a "sink" (where the trace data is captured) is shared by multiple Trace
units. So, we could share the "sink" for multiple trace units if they
are tracing the events that belong to the same "perf" session. (The
userspace tool could decode the trace data based on the TraceID
in the trace packets). Is there a better way to do this ?

Suzuki

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ