Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754286AbbEUM4Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 08:56:25 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:44991 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753246AbbEUM4X (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 08:56:23 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 14:56:15 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Stephane Eranian Cc: Ingo Molnar , Vince Weaver , Jiri Olsa , "Liang, Kan" , LKML , Andrew Hunter , Maria Dimakopoulou Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf,x86: Fix event/group validation Message-ID: <20150521125615.GO3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20150521111710.475482798@infradead.org> <20150521111932.592505273@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1971 Lines: 54 On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 05:35:02AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote: > Peter, > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Commit 43b4578071c0 ("perf/x86: Reduce stack usage of > > x86_schedule_events()") violated the rule that 'fake' scheduling; as > > used for event/group validation; should not change the event state. > > > > This went mostly un-noticed because repeated calls of > > x86_pmu::get_event_constraints() would give the same result. And > > x86_pmu::put_event_constraints() would mostly not do anything. > > > > Things could still go wrong esp. for shared_regs, because > > cpuc->is_fake can return a different constraint and then the > > put_event_constraint will not match up. > > > I don't follow this here. What do you mean by 'match up'? Ah, I wrote that Changelog for a prior patch; which by writing the changelog I found faulty. But I then forgot to update the Changelog. I was under the impression put_event_constraints() would actually take the constraint as an argument, and with the below example, it would not do put on the same it would get. > > Commit e979121b1b15 ("perf/x86/intel: Implement cross-HT corruption > > bug workaround") made the situation much worse by actually setting the > > event->hw.constraint value to NULL, so when validation and actual > > scheduling interact we get NULL ptr derefs. > > > > But x86_schedule_events() does reset the hw.constraint for each invocation: > > c = x86_pmu.get_event_constraints(cpuc, i, cpuc->event_list[i]); > hwc->constraint = c; Yes, so if you have: validate_group() hwc->constraint = c; c = hwc->constraint; The second c might not be the first. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/