linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] perf: Add support for SIGTRAP on perf events

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: <YGSMXJvLBpQOm3WV@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 16:51:08 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Matt Morehouse <mascasa@...gle.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] perf: Add support for SIGTRAP on perf events

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 02:32:58PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 at 14:07, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > (and we might already have a problem on some architectures where there
> > can be significant time between these due to not having
> > arch_irq_work_raise(), so ideally we ought to double check current in
> > your case)
> 
> I missed this bit -- just to verify: here we want to check that
> event->ctx->task == current, in case the the irq_work runs when the
> current task has already been replaced. Correct?

Yeah, just not sure what a decent failure would be, silent ignore seems
undesired, maybe WARN and archs that can trigger it get to fix it ?