netdev - Re: [RFC] A couple of issues on BPF callstack

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]

Date:   Mon, 7 Mar 2022 20:37:49 -0800
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Eugene Loh <eugene.loh@...cle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] A couple of issues on BPF callstack

Hello,

On Sat, Mar 5, 2022 at 4:28 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
> On 3/4/22 3:28 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > More important thing to me is the content of the (perf) callchain.  If
> > the event has __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY, it will have context info
> > like PERF_CONTEXT_KERNEL.  So user might or might not see it depending
> > on whether the perf_event set with precise_ip and SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN.
> > This doesn't look good.
>
> Patch 7b04d6d60fcf ("bpf: Separate bpf_get_[stack|stackid] for
> perf events BPF") tried to fix __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY issue
> for bpf_get_stack[id]() helpers.

Right.

> The helpers will check whether event->attr.sample_type has
> __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY encoded or not, based on which
> the stacks will be retrieved accordingly.
> Did you any issue here?

It changes stack trace results by adding perf contexts like
PERF_CONTEXT_KERNEL and PERF_CONTEXT_USER.
Without __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY, I don't see those.

> >
> > After all, I think it'd be really great if we can skip those
> > uninteresting info easily.  Maybe we could add a flag to skip BPF code
>
> We cannot just skip those callchains with __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY.
> There are real use cases for it.

I'm not saying that I want to skip all the callchains.
What I want is a way to avoid those perf context info
in the callchains so that I can make sure to have the
same stack traces in a known code path regardless
of the event attribute and cpu vendors - as far as I know
__PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY is enabled on Intel cpus only.

>
> > perf context, and even some scheduler code from the trace respectively
> > like in stack_trace_consume_entry_nosched().
>
> A flag for the bpf_get_stack[id]() helpers? It is possible. It would be
> great if you can detail your use case here and how a flag could help
> you.

Yep, something like BPF_F_SKIP_BPF_STACK.

In my case, I collect a callchain in a tracepoint to find its caller.
And I want to have a short call stack depth for a performance reason.
But the every 3 or 4 entries are already filled by BPF code and
I want to skip them.  I know that I can set it with skip mask but
having a hard coded value can be annoying since it might be
changed by different compilers, kernel version or configurations.

Similarly, I think it'd be useful to skip some scheduler functions
like __schedule when collecting stack traces in sched_switch.

Thanks,
Namhyung