Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756634AbbEVGuA (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 02:50:00 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:32779 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751456AbbEVGt7 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 02:49:59 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 08:49:55 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>,
        Maria Dimakopoulou <maria.n.dimakopoulou@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf,x86: Fix event/group validation
Message-ID: <20150522064955.GA26489@gmail.com>
References: <20150521125615.GO3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CABPqkBTFPRwHX8zKERYFrMBVQor5GJcDd4ZcKt8WL-tjbJdzLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150521130952.GQ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CABPqkBRbK-SNAJS8_GDWDzc5V74WV5VjECzMkuuWFSjcE5spxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150521132015.GS3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CABPqkBTvAd3RAp2AuM6DUMk4-dKs6cAXOt-Ewfw58DodmTtU4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1432214957.30671.0.camel@twins>
 <CABPqkBSeLqMeGwcnaj2yss3dAY_0naQjTCWsjREFaV-h0WzWKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1432217038.30671.7.camel@twins>
 <CABPqkBSesKybsjBPMh=D8DERQTNEkVzF-vs03Gsk1U7tjbL9fw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABPqkBSesKybsjBPMh=D8DERQTNEkVzF-vs03Gsk1U7tjbL9fw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2957
Lines: 77


* Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 06:36 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 06:27 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >> >> Or are you talking about a preemption while executing x86_schedule_events()?
> >> >
> >> > That.
> >> >
> >> > And we can of course cure that by an earlier patch I send; but I find it
> >> > a much simpler rule to just never allow modifying global state for
> >> > validation.
> >>
> >> I can see  validation being preempted, but not the context switch code path.
> >> Is that what you are talking about?
> >>
> >> You are saying validate_group() is in the middle of x86_schedule_events()
> >> using fake_cpuc, when it gets preempted. The context switch code when it loads
> >> the new thread's PMU state calls x86_schedule_events() which modifies the
> >> cpuc->event_list[]->hwc. But this is cpuc vs. fake_cpuc again. So yes, the calls
> >> nest but they do not touch the same state.
> >
> > They both touch event->hw->constraint.
> >
> >>  And when you eventually come back
> >> to validate_group() you are back to using the fake_cpuc. So I am still not clear
> >> on how the corruption can happen.
> >
> > validate_group()
> >   x86_schedule_events()
> >     event->hw.constraint = c; # store
> >
> >      <context switch>
> >        perf_task_event_sched_in()
> >          ...
> >            x86_schedule_events();
> >              event->hw.constraint = c2; # store
> >
> >              ...
> >
> >              put_event_constraints(event); # assume failure to schedule
> >                intel_put_event_constraints()
> >                  event->hw.constraint = NULL;
> >
> >       <context switch end>
> >
> >     c = event->hw.constraint; # read -> NULL
> >
> >     if (!test_bit(hwc->idx, c->idxmsk)) # <- *BOOM* NULL deref
> >
> >
> > This in particular is possible when the event in question is a cpu-wide
> > event and group-leader, where the validate_group() tries to add an event
> > to the group.
>
> Ok, I think I get it now. It is not related to fake_cpuc vs. cpuc, 
> it is related to the fact that the constraint is cached in the event 
> struct itself and that one is shared between validate_group() and 
> x86_schedule_events() because cpu_hw_event->event_list[] is an array 
> of pointers to events and not an array of events.

Btw., comments and the code structure should be greatly enhanced to 
make all that very clear and hard to mess up.

A month ago perf became fuzzing-proof, and now that's down the drain 
again...

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/