linux-kernel - Re: [Phishing Risk] [External] Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] perf/core: Introduce percpu perf

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, 23 Mar 2022 09:27:58 +0800
From:   Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
To:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.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@...nel.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        duanxiongchun@...edance.com, songmuchun@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [Phishing Risk] [External] Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] perf/core:
 Introduce percpu perf_cgroup

Hi Namhyung,

On 2022/3/23 6:18 上午, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 5:10 AM Chengming Zhou
> <zhouchengming@...edance.com> wrote:
>>
>> Although we don't have incosistency problem any more, we can
>> have other problem like:
>>
>> CPU1                                    CPU2
>> (in context_switch)                     (attach running task)
>>                                         prev->cgroups = cgrp2
>> perf_cgroup_sched_switch(prev, next)
>>         cgrp2 == cgrp2 is True
>>
>> If perf_cgroup of prev task changes from cgrp1 to cgrp2,
>> perf_cgroup_sched_switch() will skip perf_cgroup_switch(),
>> so the CPU would still schedule the cgrp1 events, but we should
>> schedule the cgrp2 events.
> 
> Ah ok, now I see the problem in changing prev->cgroup too.
> 
>>
>> The reason of this problem is that we shouldn't use the changeable
>> prev->cgroups to decide whether skip perf_cgroup_switch().
>>
>> This patch introduces a percpu perf_cgroup to cache the perf_cgroup
>> that scheduled in cpuctxes, which later used to compare with the
>> perf_cgroup of next task to decide whether skip perf_cgroup_switch().
>>
>> Since the perf_cgroup_switch() can be called after the context switch,
>> the cgroup events might be scheduled already. So we put the comparison
>> of perf_cgroups in perf_cgroup_switch(), and delete the unused function
>> perf_cgroup_sched_switch().
>>
>> We must clear the percpu perf_cgroup cache when the last cgroup event
>> disabled.
>>
>> Fixes: a8d757ef076f ("perf events: Fix slow and broken cgroup context switch code")
>> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/events/core.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++----------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index 8b5cf2aedfe6..848a3bfa9513 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -826,6 +826,7 @@ perf_cgroup_set_timestamp(struct task_struct *task,
>>         }
>>  }
>>
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct perf_cgroup *, cpu_perf_cgroup);
>>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct list_head, cgrp_cpuctx_list);
>>
>>  /*
>> @@ -833,6 +834,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct list_head, cgrp_cpuctx_list);
>>   */
>>  static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
>>  {
>> +       struct perf_cgroup *cgrp;
>>         struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx, *tmp;
>>         struct list_head *list;
>>         unsigned long flags;
>> @@ -843,11 +845,21 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
>>          */
>>         local_irq_save(flags);
>>
>> +       cgrp = perf_cgroup_from_task(task, NULL);
>> +       if (cgrp == __this_cpu_read(cpu_perf_cgroup))
>> +               goto out;
>> +
>> +       __this_cpu_write(cpu_perf_cgroup, cgrp);
>> +
>>         list = this_cpu_ptr(&cgrp_cpuctx_list);
>>         list_for_each_entry_safe(cpuctx, tmp, list, cgrp_cpuctx_entry) {
>>                 WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->ctx.nr_cgroups == 0);
>>
>>                 perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>> +
>> +               if (cpuctx->cgrp == cgrp)
> 
> Missing perf_ctx_unlock().

Thank you, will fix next version.

> 
> Thanks,
> Namhyung
> 
>> +                       continue;
>> +
>>                 perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
>>
>>                 cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_ALL);
>> @@ -855,14 +867,11 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
>>                  * must not be done before ctxswout due
>>                  * to event_filter_match() in event_sched_out()
>>                  */
>> -               cpuctx->cgrp = perf_cgroup_from_task(task,
>> -                                                    &cpuctx->ctx);
>> +               cpuctx->cgrp = cgrp;
>>                 /*
>>                  * set cgrp before ctxsw in to allow
>>                  * event_filter_match() to not have to pass
>>                  * task around
>> -                * we pass the cpuctx->ctx to perf_cgroup_from_task()
>> -                * because cgroup events are only per-cpu
>>                  */
>>                 cpu_ctx_sched_in(cpuctx, EVENT_ALL, task);
>>
>> @@ -870,35 +879,10 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
>>                 perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>>         }
>>
>> +out:
>>         local_irq_restore(flags);
>>  }