linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 28/39] unwind_user/deferred: Add deferred unwinding interface

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250123081718.GC3808@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:17:18 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@...cle.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org, Jordan Rome <jordalgo@...a.com>,
	Sam James <sam@...too.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
	Jens Remus <jremus@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Weinan Liu <wnliu@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 28/39] unwind_user/deferred: Add deferred unwinding
 interface

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 02:51:27PM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 03:16:16PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 02:37:30PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 06:31:20PM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * The context cookie is a unique identifier which allows post-processing to
> > > > + * correlate kernel trace(s) with user unwinds.  The high 12 bits are the CPU
> > > 
> > > s/12/16/ ?
> > > 
> > > > + * id; the lower 48 bits are a per-CPU entry counter.
> > > > + */
> > > > +static u64 ctx_to_cookie(u64 cpu, u64 ctx)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	BUILD_BUG_ON(NR_CPUS > 65535);
> > > > +	return (ctx & ((1UL << 48) - 1)) | (cpu << 48);
> > > > +}
> > 
> > Also, I have to note that 0 is a valid return value here, which will
> > give a ton of fun.
> 
> The ctx_ctr is always incremented before calling this, so 0 isn't a
> valid cookie.

Right, so that's the problem. You're considering 0 an invalid cookie,
but ctx_to_cookie(0, 1<<48) will be a 0 cookie.

That thing *will* wrap.