linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] perf record: Directly bail out for compat case

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:   Wed, 2 Jun 2021 20:38:47 +0800
From:   Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] perf record: Directly bail out for compat case

Hi Adrain,

On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 02:18:47PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 2/06/21 1:30 pm, Leo Yan wrote:
> > Since the 64-bit atomicity is not promised in 32-bit perf, directly
> > report the error and bail out for this case.
> > 
> > Now only applies on x86_64 and Arm64 platforms.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> 
> Maybe we can do better for the compat case.
> 
> We can assume the upper 32-bits change very seldom,
> and always increase. So for the 'read' case:
> 
> 	u64 first, second, last;
> 	u64 mask = (u64)((u32)-1) << 32;
> 
> 	do {
> 		first = READ_ONCE(pc->aux_head);
> 		rmb();
> 		second = READ_ONCE(pc->aux_head);
> 		rmb();
> 		last = READ_ONCE(pc->aux_head);
> 	} while ((first & mask) != (last & mask));
> 	return second;
> 
> For the write case, we can cause a fatal error only if the new
> tail has non-zero upper 32-bits.  That gives up to 4GiB of data
> before aborting:
> 
> 	if (tail & mask)
> 		return -1;
> 	smp_mb();
> 	WRITE_ONCE(pc->aux_tail, tail);

Seems to me, it's pointless to only support aux_head for 64-bit and
support aux_tail for 32-bit.  I understand this can be helpful for the
snapshot mode which only uses aux_head, but it still fails to support
the normal case for AUX ring buffer using 64-bit head/tail.

Thanks,
Leo