linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Rewrite core context handling

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: <8f5b618e-e0a1-c5f2-3d4d-a41ea96fd59c@amd.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Sep 2022 10:10:14 +0530
From:   Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        jolsa@...hat.com, namhyung@...nel.org, songliubraving@...com,
        eranian@...gle.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        frederic@...nel.org, maddy@...ux.ibm.com, irogers@...gle.com,
        will@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        sandipan.das@....com, ananth.narayan@....com, kim.phillips@....com,
        santosh.shukla@....com, ravi.bangoria@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Rewrite core context handling

> So the basic issue I mentioned is that:
> 
> 
> /*
>  *           ,------------------------[1:n]---------------------.
>  *           V                                                  V
>  * perf_event_context <-[1:n]-> perf_event_pmu_context <--- perf_event
>  *           ^                      ^     |                     |
>  *           `--------[1:n]---------'     `-[n:1]-> pmu <-[1:n]-'
>  *
>  *
>  * XXX destroy epc when empty
>  *   refcount, !rcu
>  *
>  * XXX epc locking
>  *
>  *   event->pmu_ctx            ctx->mutex && inactive
>  *   ctx->pmu_ctx_list         ctx->mutex && ctx->lock
>  *
>  */
> struct perf_event_pmu_context {
> 	...
>         atomic_t                        refcount; /* event <-> epc */
> 	...
> }
> 
> But that then also suggests that:
> 
> struct perf_event_context {
> 	...
>         refcount_t                      refcount;
> 	...
> }
> 
> should be: ctx <-> epc, and that is not so, the ctx::refcount still
> counts the number of events.
> 
> Now this might not be bad, but it is confusing.

I don't have strong opinion, but we store events in ctx, not in pmu_ctx.
So, I think it makes sense to keep refcount as ctx <-> event?

[...]

> +void perf_pmu_migrate_context(struct pmu *pmu, int src_cpu, int dst_cpu)
> +{
> +	struct perf_event_context *src_ctx, *dst_ctx;
> +	LIST_HEAD(events);
> +
> +	src_ctx = &per_cpu_ptr(&cpu_context, src_cpu)->ctx;
> +	dst_ctx = &per_cpu_ptr(&cpu_context, dst_cpu)->ctx;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * See perf_event_ctx_lock() for comments on the details
> +	 * of swizzling perf_event::ctx.
> +	 */
> +	mutex_lock_double(&src_ctx->mutex, &dst_ctx->mutex);
> +
> +	__perf_pmu_remove(src_ctx, src_cpu, pmu, &src_src->pinned_groups, &events);
> +	__perf_pmu_remove(src_ctx, src_cpu, pmu, &src_src->flexible_groups, &events);

Rbtrees does not contain sibling events. Shouldn't we continue using
event_list here?

Thanks,
Ravi