Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9b3259e8-1d07-adb1-a57c-8b276c133aa6@linux.intel.com>
References: <1529057003-2212-1-git-send-email-yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
 <CAP045Aq_FEc_pEeRL86uXbOLBeW7aPvTqtnaq+Mbi-2=vp2BNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1a442b37-7a97-86f0-11e3-58d940ecfbc9@linux.intel.com> <CAP045ApFKUqUUf76GtWyxpYWdWe1RxYkPm1R2kUxaQyc4Fhucg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOp6jLadgwdiW+1BNFFhNSBD-i1ACju4PeuozxvD26Mrekwd9w@mail.gmail.com> <9b3259e8-1d07-adb1-a57c-8b276c133aa6@linux.intel.com>
From:   Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jun 2018 17:56:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP045ApiQpOdgqK-Wn-2scsu5WycPYmSTQtoHGkviuwuhs5jDg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] perf: Drop leaked kernel samples
To:     "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, acme@kernel.org,
        jolsa@kernel.org, "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        open list <Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, ak@linux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@intel.com, yao.jin@intel.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Jin, Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This patch raised many questions, I was prepared. :)
>
> I'd like to try another proposal that it adds a special flag in the returned
> perf_sample_data to indicate the perf binary that this sample is a leaked
> sample.
>
> For example, create a new PERF_SAMPLE_RETURN_LEAKAGE in
> perf_event_sample_format.
>
> In perf_prepare_sample(),
>
> if (event->attr.exclude_kernel && !user_mode(regs))
>         data->type |= PERF_SAMPLE_RETURN_LEAKAGE;
>
> Now all the samples are kept and the leaked kernel samples are tagged with
> PERF_SAMPLE_RETURN_LEAKAGE.
>
> In perf binary, it filters out the samples with PERF_SAMPLE_RETURN_LEAKAGE.
> It needs perf binary modification but rr doesn't need to be changed.
>
> I don't 0-stuffing some fields because:
>
> 1. Keeping the skid info should allow us to look at that if we have
> interesting later.
>
> 2. Not sure if 0-stuffing some fields has potential conflicts with some
> applications.
>
> Is this proposal reasonable?
>
> Thanks
> Jin Yao
>
>
> On 6/16/2018 1:34 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> If you want a sysctl for your own reasons that's fine. But we don't
>>> want a sysctl. We want to work without any further configuration.
>>
>>
>> Also toggling a sysctl would require root privileges, but rr does not
>> currently need to run as root. Thus rr users would have to either
>> permanently change their system configuration (and every extra
>> configuration step is a pain), or run rr as root so rr can toggle the
>> sysctl itself. Running rr as root is highly undesirable.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>

If the problem you're trying to fix is an inappropriate disclosure of
kernel-space information to user-space, how does filtering the samples
in user space solve anything?

- Kyle