Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1946646AbbEVJ05 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 05:26:57 -0400
Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]:34917 "EHLO
	mail-ob0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1946631AbbEVJ0t (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 22 May 2015 05:26:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <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>
	<20150522064955.GA26489@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 02:26:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CABPqkBQ9yGaXtHomrvBtjXs0K4fvgcqceOpM2sTYSSg+F+6_dg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf,x86: Fix event/group validation
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3206
Lines: 80

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>
> * 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.
>
Peter and I will clean this up.

>
> A month ago perf became fuzzing-proof, and now that's down the drain
> again...
>
It will be fixed this week.
--
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/