linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] trace/trace_event_perf: remove duplicate samples on the first tracepoint event

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240926085118.0a823138@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:51:18 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Levi Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
Cc: mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
 a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mingo@...e.hu, mark.rutland@....com,
 james.clark@...aro.org, nd@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
 <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] trace/trace_event_perf: remove duplicate samples on
 the first tracepoint event

Can one of the perf folks give me an Ack, and I'll take this through my tree.

-- Steve


On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 03:13:47 +0100
Levi Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com> wrote:

> When a tracepoint event is created with attr.freq = 1,
> 'hwc->period_left' is not initialized correctly. As a result,
> in the perf_swevent_overflow() function, when the first time the event occurs,
> it calculates the event overflow and the perf_swevent_set_period() returns 3,
> this leads to the event are recorded for three duplicate times.
> 
> Step to reproduce:
>     1. Enable the tracepoint event & starting tracing
>          $ echo 1 > /sys/kernel/tracing/events/module/module_free
>          $ echo 1 > /sys/kernel/tracing/tracing_on
> 
>     2. Record with perf
>          $ perf record -a --strict-freq -F 1 -e "module:module_free"
> 
>     3. Trigger module_free event.
>          $ modprobe -i sunrpc
>          $ modprobe -r sunrpc
> 
> Result:
>      - Trace pipe result:
>          $ cat trace_pipe
>          modprobe-174509  [003] .....  6504.868896: module_free: sunrpc
> 
>      - perf sample:
>          modprobe  174509 [003]  6504.868980: module:module_free: sunrpc
>          modprobe  174509 [003]  6504.868980: module:module_free: sunrpc
>          modprobe  174509 [003]  6504.868980: module:module_free: sunrpc
> 
> By setting period_left via perf_swevent_set_period() as other sw_event did,
> This problem could be solved.
> 
> After patch:
>      - Trace pipe result:
>          $ cat trace_pipe
>          modprobe 1153096 [068] 613468.867774: module:module_free: xfs
> 
>      - perf sample
>          modprobe 1153096 [068] 613468.867794: module:module_free: xfs
> 
> Fixes: bd2b5b12849a ("perf_counter: More aggressive frequency adjustment")
> Signed-off-by: Levi Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - Fix build error.
> ---
>  kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
> index 05e791241812..3ff9caa4a71b 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
> @@ -352,10 +352,16 @@ void perf_uprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event)
>  int perf_trace_add(struct perf_event *p_event, int flags)
>  {
>  	struct trace_event_call *tp_event = p_event->tp_event;
> +	struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &p_event->hw;
> 
>  	if (!(flags & PERF_EF_START))
>  		p_event->hw.state = PERF_HES_STOPPED;
> 
> +	if (is_sampling_event(p_event)) {
> +		hwc->last_period = hwc->sample_period;
> +		perf_swevent_set_period(p_event);
> +	}
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * If TRACE_REG_PERF_ADD returns false; no custom action was performed
>  	 * and we need to take the default action of enqueueing our event on
> --
> LEVI:{C3F47F37-75D8-414A-A8BA-3980EC8A46D7}