| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW4s5ZaZB0kFz8CWK-NvS4KrE7w90Fzz-wF5WgUMC7dPog@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 15:05:29 -0800
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
Cc: Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>,
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>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] perf/bpf: Call bpf handler directly, not through
overflow machinery
On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 8:55 PM Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com> wrote:
>
> To ultimately allow bpf programs attached to perf events to completely
> suppress all of the effects of a perf event overflow (rather than just the
> sample output, as they do today), call bpf_overflow_handler() from
> __perf_event_overflow() directly rather than modifying struct perf_event's
> overflow_handler. Return the bpf program's return value from
> bpf_overflow_handler() so that __perf_event_overflow() knows how to
> proceed. Remove the now unnecessary orig_overflow_handler from struct
> perf_event.
>
> This patch is solely a refactoring and results in no behavior change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>
> Suggested-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 6 +-----
> kernel/events/core.c | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 5547ba68e6e4..312b9f31442c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -810,7 +810,6 @@ struct perf_event {
> perf_overflow_handler_t overflow_handler;
> void *overflow_handler_context;
> #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
> - perf_overflow_handler_t orig_overflow_handler;
> struct bpf_prog *prog;
> u64 bpf_cookie;
> #endif
> @@ -1337,10 +1336,7 @@ __is_default_overflow_handler(perf_overflow_handler_t overflow_handler)
> #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
> static inline bool uses_default_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event)
> {
> - if (likely(is_default_overflow_handler(event)))
> - return true;
> -
> - return __is_default_overflow_handler(event->orig_overflow_handler);
> + return is_default_overflow_handler(event);
> }
> #else
> #define uses_default_overflow_handler(event) \
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index b704d83a28b2..54f6372d2634 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -9515,6 +9515,12 @@ static inline bool sample_is_allowed(struct perf_event *event, struct pt_regs *r
> return true;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
> +static int bpf_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event,
> + struct perf_sample_data *data,
> + struct pt_regs *regs);
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * Generic event overflow handling, sampling.
> */
> @@ -9584,7 +9590,10 @@ static int __perf_event_overflow(struct perf_event *event,
> irq_work_queue(&event->pending_irq);
> }
>
> - READ_ONCE(event->overflow_handler)(event, data, regs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
> + if (!(event->prog && !bpf_overflow_handler(event, data, regs)))
This condition is hard to follow. Please consider simplifying it.
Thanks,
Song
> +#endif
> + READ_ONCE(event->overflow_handler)(event, data, regs);
>
> if (*perf_event_fasync(event) && event->pending_kill) {
> event->pending_wakeup = 1;
> @@ -10394,9 +10403,9 @@ static void perf_event_free_filter(struct perf_event *event)
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
> -static void bpf_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event,
> - struct perf_sample_data *data,
> - struct pt_regs *regs)
> +static int bpf_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event,
> + struct perf_sample_data *data,
> + struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct bpf_perf_event_data_kern ctx = {
> .data = data,
> @@ -10417,10 +10426,8 @@ static void bpf_overflow_handler(struct perf_event *event,
> rcu_read_unlock();
> out:
> __this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
> - if (!ret)
> - return;
>
> - event->orig_overflow_handler(event, data, regs);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static int perf_event_set_bpf_handler(struct perf_event *event,
> @@ -10456,8 +10463,6 @@ static int perf_event_set_bpf_handler(struct perf_event *event,
>
> event->prog = prog;
> event->bpf_cookie = bpf_cookie;
> - event->orig_overflow_handler = READ_ONCE(event->overflow_handler);
> - WRITE_ONCE(event->overflow_handler, bpf_overflow_handler);
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -10468,7 +10473,6 @@ static void perf_event_free_bpf_handler(struct perf_event *event)
> if (!prog)
> return;
>
> - WRITE_ONCE(event->overflow_handler, event->orig_overflow_handler);
> event->prog = NULL;
> bpf_prog_put(prog);
> }
> @@ -11928,13 +11932,11 @@ perf_event_alloc(struct perf_event_attr *attr, int cpu,
> overflow_handler = parent_event->overflow_handler;
> context = parent_event->overflow_handler_context;
> #if defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) && defined(CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING)
> - if (overflow_handler == bpf_overflow_handler) {
> + if (parent_event->prog) {
> struct bpf_prog *prog = parent_event->prog;
>
> bpf_prog_inc(prog);
> event->prog = prog;
> - event->orig_overflow_handler =
> - parent_event->orig_overflow_handler;
> }
> #endif
> }
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists