[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YzLtAG2bfRJ/vFRu@elver.google.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:30:56 +0200
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: 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>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix missing SIGTRAPs due to pending_disable abuse
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 02:13PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> Due to the implementation of how SIGTRAP are delivered if
> perf_event_attr::sigtrap is set, we've noticed 3 issues:
>
> 1. Missing SIGTRAP due to a race with event_sched_out() (more
> details below).
>
> 2. Hardware PMU events being disabled due to returning 1 from
> perf_event_overflow(). The only way to re-enable the event is
> for user space to first "properly" disable the event and then
> re-enable it.
>
> 3. The inability to automatically disable an event after a
> specified number of overflows via PERF_EVENT_IOC_REFRESH.
>
> The worst of the 3 issues is problem (1), which occurs when a
> pending_disable is "consumed" by a racing event_sched_out(), observed as
> follows:
>
> CPU0 | CPU1
> --------------------------------+---------------------------
> __perf_event_overflow() |
> perf_event_disable_inatomic() |
> pending_disable = CPU0 | ...
> | _perf_event_enable()
> | event_function_call()
> | task_function_call()
> | /* sends IPI to CPU0 */
> <IPI> | ...
> __perf_event_enable() +---------------------------
> ctx_resched()
> task_ctx_sched_out()
> ctx_sched_out()
> group_sched_out()
> event_sched_out()
> pending_disable = -1
> </IPI>
> <IRQ-work>
> perf_pending_event()
> perf_pending_event_disable()
> /* Fails to send SIGTRAP because no pending_disable! */
> </IRQ-work>
>
> In the above case, not only is that particular SIGTRAP missed, but also
> all future SIGTRAPs because 'event_limit' is not reset back to 1.
>
> To fix, rework pending delivery of SIGTRAP via IRQ-work by introduction
> of a separate 'pending_sigtrap', no longer using 'event_limit' and
> 'pending_disable' for its delivery.
>
> During testing, this also revealed several more possible races between
> reschedules and pending IRQ work; see code comments for details.
>
> Doing so makes it possible to use 'event_limit' normally (thereby
> enabling use of PERF_EVENT_IOC_REFRESH), perf_event_overflow() no longer
> returns 1 on SIGTRAP causing disabling of hardware PMUs, and finally the
> race is no longer possible due to event_sched_out() not consuming
> 'pending_disable'.
>
> Fixes: 97ba62b27867 ("perf: Add support for SIGTRAP on perf events")
> Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> Debugged-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 +
> kernel/events/core.c | 85 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 907b0e3f1318..dff3430844a2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -740,8 +740,10 @@ struct perf_event {
> int pending_wakeup;
> int pending_kill;
> int pending_disable;
> + int pending_sigtrap;
> unsigned long pending_addr; /* SIGTRAP */
> struct irq_work pending;
> + struct irq_work pending_resched;
>
> atomic_t event_limit;
>
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 75f5705b6892..df90777262bf 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -2527,6 +2527,14 @@ event_sched_in(struct perf_event *event,
> if (event->attr.exclusive)
> cpuctx->exclusive = 1;
>
> + if (event->pending_sigtrap) {
> + /*
> + * The task and event might have been moved to another CPU:
> + * queue another IRQ work. See perf_pending_event_sigtrap().
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!irq_work_queue(&event->pending_resched));
One question we had is if it's possible for an event to be scheduled in,
immediately scheduled out, and then scheduled in on a 3rd CPU. I.e. we'd
still be in trouble if we can do this:
CPU0
sched-out
CPU1
sched-in
sched-out
CPU2
sched-in
without any IRQ work ever running. Some naive solutions so the
pending_resched IRQ work isn't needed, like trying to send a signal
right here (or in event_sched_out()), don't work because we've seen
syzkaller produce programs where there's a pending event and then the
scheduler moves the task; because we're in the scheduler we can deadlock
if we try to send the signal here.
Thanks,
-- Marco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists