linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V9 3/3] perf/x86/intel: Support PEBS counters snapshotting

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: <e05bb0c7-cbbb-422a-882c-1dfa648b29e9@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:25:03 -0500
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
 irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, eranian@...gle.com,
 dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V9 3/3] perf/x86/intel: Support PEBS counters snapshotting



On 2025-01-16 4:50 p.m., Liang, Kan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2025-01-16 3:56 p.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 09:42:25PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:55:46AM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Also, I think I found you another bug... Consider what happens to the
>>>>> counter value when we reschedule a HES_STOPPED counter, then we skip
>>>>> x86_pmu_start(RELOAD) on step2, which leave the counter value with
>>>>> 'random' crap from whatever was there last.
>>>>>
>>>>> But meanwhile you do program PEBS to sample it. That will happily sample
>>>>> this garbage.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not quite sure I understand the issue.
>>>>
>>>> The HES_STOPPED counter should be a pre-existing counter. Just for some
>>>> reason, it's stopped, right? So perf doesn't need to re-configure the
>>>> PEBS__DATA_CFG, since the idx is not changed.
>>>
>>> Suppose you have your group {A, B, C} and lets suppose A is the PEBS
>>> event, further suppose that B is also a sampling event. Lets say they
>>> get hardware counters 1,2 and 3 respectively.
>>>
>>> Then lets say B gets throttled.
>>>
>>> While it is throttled, we get a new event D scheduled, and D gets placed
>>> on counter 2 -- where B lives, which gets moved over to counter 4.
>>>
>>> Then our loops will update and remove B from 2, but because
>>> throttled/HES_STOPPED it will not start it on counter 4.
>>>>> Meanwhile, we do have the PEBS_DATA_CFG thing updated to sample counter
>>> 1,3 and 4.
>>>
>>> PEBS assist happens, and samples the uninitialized counter 4.
>>> Also, by skipping x86_pmu_start() we miss the assignment of
>> cpuc->events[] so PEBS buffer decode can't even find the dodgy event.
>>
> 
> Yes, counter 4 includes garbage before the B is started again.
> But the cpuc->events[counter 4] is NULL either.
> 
> The current implementation ignores the NULL cpuc->events[]. The stopped
> B should not be mistakenly updated.
> 
> +static void intel_perf_event_pmc_to_count(struct perf_event *event, u64
> pmc)
> +{
> +	int shift = 64 - x86_pmu.cntval_bits;
> +	struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
> +	u64 delta, prev_pmc;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * The PEBS record doesn't shrink on pmu::del().
> +	 * See pebs_update_state().
> +	 * Ignore the non-exist event.
> +	 */
> +	if (!event)
> +		return;
> 
> 

I've sent a V10 to address all the comments in V9.
The above case is explained in the comments of
intel_perf_event_update_pmc() in V10.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250121152303.3128733-4-kan.liang@linux.intel.com/

Please take a look and let me know if it's not sufficient to handle the
case.

Thanks,
Kan