linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 1/3] perf: enable branch record for software 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6BA620C1-D311-4992-8119-68A740ABA8BC@fb.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 16:45:29 +0000
From:   Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "kjain@...ux.ibm.com" <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 1/3] perf: enable branch record for software
 events

Hi Peter,

> On Sep 3, 2021, at 1:27 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 09:57:04AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> 
>> +static int
>> +intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack(struct perf_branch_entry *entries, unsigned int cnt)
>> +{
>> +	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>> +
>> +	intel_pmu_disable_all();
>> +	intel_pmu_lbr_read();
>> +	cnt = min_t(unsigned int, cnt, x86_pmu.lbr_nr);
>> +
>> +	memcpy(entries, cpuc->lbr_entries, sizeof(struct perf_branch_entry) * cnt);
>> +	intel_pmu_enable_all(0);
>> +	return cnt;
>> +}
> 
> Given this disables the PMI from 'random' contexts, should we not add
> IRQ disabling around this to avoid really bad behaviour?

Do you mean we should add (instead of not add) IRQ disable?

Thanks,
Song