linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "perf/x86: Allow zero PEBS status with only single active event"

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, 16 Mar 2021 08:28:47 -0400
From:   "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        "stable # 4 . 5" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "perf/x86: Allow zero PEBS status with only single
 active event"



On 3/16/2021 3:22 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Peter and Kan,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 5:22 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 02:53:00PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
>>> On 3/3/2021 1:59 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:42:18AM -0800, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>>>> @@ -2000,18 +2000,6 @@ static void intel_pmu_drain_pebs_nhm(struct pt_regs *iregs, struct perf_sample_d
>>>>>                            continue;
>>>>>                    }
>>>>> -         /*
>>>>> -          * On some CPUs the PEBS status can be zero when PEBS is
>>>>> -          * racing with clearing of GLOBAL_STATUS.
>>>>> -          *
>>>>> -          * Normally we would drop that record, but in the
>>>>> -          * case when there is only a single active PEBS event
>>>>> -          * we can assume it's for that event.
>>>>> -          */
>>>>> -         if (!pebs_status && cpuc->pebs_enabled &&
>>>>> -                 !(cpuc->pebs_enabled & (cpuc->pebs_enabled-1)))
>>>>> -                 pebs_status = cpuc->pebs_enabled;
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't something like:
>>>>
>>>>                      pebs_status = p->status = cpus->pebs_enabled;
>>>>
>>>
>>> I didn't consider it as a potential solution in this patch because I don't
>>> think it's a proper way that SW modifies the buffer, which is supposed to be
>>> manipulated by the HW.
>>
>> Right, but then HW was supposed to write sane values and it doesn't do
>> that either ;-)
>>
>>> It's just a personal preference. I don't see any issue here. We may try it.
>>
>> So I mostly agree with you, but I think it's a shame to unsupport such
>> chips, HSW is still a plenty useable chip today.
> 
> I got a similar issue on ivybridge machines which caused kernel crash.
> My case it's related to the branch stack with PEBS events but I think
> it's the same issue.  And I can confirm that the above approach of
> updating p->status fixed the problem.
> 
> I've talked to Stephane about this, and he wants to make it more
> robust when we see stale (or invalid) PEBS records.  I'll send the
> patch soon.
> 

Hi Namhyung,

In case you didn't see it, I've already submitted a patch to fix the 
issue last Friday.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1615555298-140216-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com/
But if you have a more robust proposal, please feel free to submit it.

BTW: The patch set from last Friday also fixed another bug found by the 
perf_fuzzer test. You may be interested.

Thanks,
Kan