From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
Igor Lubashev <ilubashe@akamai.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
"selinux@vger.kernel.org" <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-man@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/12] Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2020 13:56:43 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200407165643.GD12003@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200407163654.GB12003@kernel.org>
Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:36:54PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 05:54:27PM +0300, Alexey Budankov escreveu:
> > On 07.04.2020 17:35, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 11:30:14AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ type perf
> > >> perf is hashed (/home/perf/bin/perf)
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ getcap /home/perf/bin/perf
> > >> /home/perf/bin/perf = cap_sys_ptrace,cap_syslog,38+ep
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ groups
> > >> perf perf_users
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ id
> > >> uid=1002(perf) gid=1002(perf) groups=1002(perf),1003(perf_users) context=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio
> > >> Error:
> > >> Failed to mmap with 1 (Operation not permitted)
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf record -a
> > >> ^C[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> > >> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 1.177 MB perf.data (1552 samples) ]
> > >>
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf evlist
> > >> cycles:u
> > >> [perf@five ~]$
> > >
> > > Humm, perf record falls back to cycles:u after initially trying cycles
> > > (i.e. kernel and userspace), lemme see trying 'perf top -e cycles:u',
> > > lemme test, humm not really:
> > >
> > > [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio -e cycles:u
> > > Error:
> > > Failed to mmap with 1 (Operation not permitted)
> > > [perf@five ~]$ perf record -e cycles:u -a sleep 1
> > > [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> > > [ perf record: Captured and wrote 1.123 MB perf.data (132 samples) ]
> > > [perf@five ~]$
> > >
> > > Back to debugging this.
> >
> > Could makes sense adding cap_ipc_lock to the binary to isolate from this:
> >
> > kernel/events/core.c: 6101
> > if ((locked > lock_limit) && perf_is_paranoid() &&
> > !capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK)) {
> > ret = -EPERM;
> > goto unlock;
> > }
>
>
> That did the trick, I'll update the documentation and include in my
> "Committer testing" section:
>
> [perf@five ~]$ groups
> perf perf_users
> [perf@five ~]$ ls -lahF bin/perf
> -rwxr-x---. 1 root perf_users 24M Apr 7 10:34 bin/perf*
> [perf@five ~]$ getcap bin/perf
> bin/perf = cap_ipc_lock,cap_sys_ptrace,cap_syslog,38+ep
> [perf@five ~]$
> [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio
>
>
> PerfTop: 652 irqs/sec kernel:73.8% exact: 99.7% lost: 0/0 drop: 0/0 [4000Hz cycles:u], (all, 12 CPUs)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 13.03% [kernel] [k] module_get_kallsym
> 5.25% [kernel] [k] kallsyms_expand_symbol.constprop.0
> 5.00% libc-2.30.so [.] __GI_____strtoull_l_internal
> 4.41% [kernel] [k] memcpy
> 3.42% [kernel] [k] vsnprintf
> 2.98% perf [.] map__process_kallsym_symbol
> 2.86% [kernel] [k] format_decode
> 2.73% [kernel] [k] number
> 2.70% perf [.] rb_next
> 2.59% perf [.] maps__split_kallsyms
> 2.54% [kernel] [k] string_nocheck
> 1.90% libc-2.30.so [.] _IO_getdelim
> 1.86% [kernel] [k] __x86_indirect_thunk_rax
> 1.53% libc-2.30.so [.] _int_malloc
> 1.48% libc-2.30.so [.] __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms
> 1.40% [kernel] [k] clear_page_rep
> 1.07% perf [.] rb_insert_color
> 1.01% libc-2.30.so [.] _IO_feof
> 0.99% perf [.] __dso__load_kallsyms
> 0.98% [kernel] [k] s_next
> 0.96% perf [.] __rblist__findnew
> 0.95% [kernel] [k] strlen
> 0.95% perf [.] arch__symbols__fixup_end
> 0.94% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4af
> 0.94% perf [.] symbol__new
> 0.89% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4a0
> 0.86% [kernel] [k] seq_read
> 0.81% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4ab
> 0.80% perf [.] __symbols__insert
> 0.73% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4a7
> 0.67% [kernel] [k] s_show
> 0.66% libc-2.30.so [.] __libc_calloc
> 0.61% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4bb
> 0.59% [kernel] [k] get_page_from_freelist
> 0.59% perf [.] memcpy@plt
> 0.58% perf [.] eprintf
> exiting.
> [perf@five ~]$
>
> There is still something strange in here, the event is cycles:u (see at
> the PerfTop line, but it is getting kernel samples :-\
So running with 'perf top --stdio -vv 2> /tmp/output' I see we try
create three events, the first is some capability querying, then we try
to determine the max precision level, but continue with
attr.exclude_kernel=1, which shouldn't be the case, perhaps we're seeing
that it is not the root in the tooling part, and end up setting that to
1 as, previously, we knew it would fail, so we should switch to checking
if we have cap_perfmon too, will check that:
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
type 1
size 120
config 0x9
watermark 1
sample_id_all 1
bpf_event 1
{ wakeup_events, wakeup_watermark } 1
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
size 120
{ sample_period, sample_freq } 4000
sample_type IP|TID|TIME|CPU|PERIOD
read_format ID
disabled 1
inherit 1
exclude_kernel 1
mmap 1
comm 1
freq 1
task 1
precise_ip 3
sample_id_all 1
exclude_guest 1
mmap2 1
comm_exec 1
ksymbol 1
bpf_event 1
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
size 120
{ sample_period, sample_freq } 4000
sample_type IP|TID|TIME|CPU|PERIOD
read_format ID
disabled 1
inherit 1
exclude_kernel 1
mmap 1
comm 1
freq 1
task 1
precise_ip 2
sample_id_all 1
exclude_guest 1
mmap2 1
comm_exec 1
ksymbol 1
bpf_event 1
------------------------------------------------------------
But then, even with that attr.exclude_kernel set to 1 we _still_ get
kernel samples, which looks like another bug, now trying with strace,
which leads us to another rabbit hole:
[perf@five ~]$ strace -e perf_event_open -o /tmp/out.put perf top --stdio
Error:
You may not have permission to collect system-wide stats.
Consider tweaking /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid,
which controls use of the performance events system by
unprivileged users (without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN).
The current value is 2:
-1: Allow use of (almost) all events by all users
Ignore mlock limit after perf_event_mlock_kb without CAP_IPC_LOCK
>= 0: Disallow ftrace function tracepoint by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
Disallow raw tracepoint access by users without CAP_SYS_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
>= 1: Disallow CPU event access by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
>= 2: Disallow kernel profiling by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
To make this setting permanent, edit /etc/sysctl.conf too, e.g.:
kernel.perf_event_paranoid = -1
[perf@five ~]$
If I remove that strace -e ... from the front, 'perf top' is back
working as a non-cap_sys_admin user, just with cap_perfmon.
- Arnaldo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Igor Lubashev <ilubashe@akamai.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"selinux@vger.kernel.org" <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 00/12] Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2020 13:56:43 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200407165643.GD12003@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200407163654.GB12003@kernel.org>
Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 01:36:54PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 05:54:27PM +0300, Alexey Budankov escreveu:
> > On 07.04.2020 17:35, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 11:30:14AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ type perf
> > >> perf is hashed (/home/perf/bin/perf)
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ getcap /home/perf/bin/perf
> > >> /home/perf/bin/perf = cap_sys_ptrace,cap_syslog,38+ep
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ groups
> > >> perf perf_users
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ id
> > >> uid=1002(perf) gid=1002(perf) groups=1002(perf),1003(perf_users) context=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio
> > >> Error:
> > >> Failed to mmap with 1 (Operation not permitted)
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf record -a
> > >> ^C[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> > >> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 1.177 MB perf.data (1552 samples) ]
> > >>
> > >> [perf@five ~]$ perf evlist
> > >> cycles:u
> > >> [perf@five ~]$
> > >
> > > Humm, perf record falls back to cycles:u after initially trying cycles
> > > (i.e. kernel and userspace), lemme see trying 'perf top -e cycles:u',
> > > lemme test, humm not really:
> > >
> > > [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio -e cycles:u
> > > Error:
> > > Failed to mmap with 1 (Operation not permitted)
> > > [perf@five ~]$ perf record -e cycles:u -a sleep 1
> > > [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> > > [ perf record: Captured and wrote 1.123 MB perf.data (132 samples) ]
> > > [perf@five ~]$
> > >
> > > Back to debugging this.
> >
> > Could makes sense adding cap_ipc_lock to the binary to isolate from this:
> >
> > kernel/events/core.c: 6101
> > if ((locked > lock_limit) && perf_is_paranoid() &&
> > !capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK)) {
> > ret = -EPERM;
> > goto unlock;
> > }
>
>
> That did the trick, I'll update the documentation and include in my
> "Committer testing" section:
>
> [perf@five ~]$ groups
> perf perf_users
> [perf@five ~]$ ls -lahF bin/perf
> -rwxr-x---. 1 root perf_users 24M Apr 7 10:34 bin/perf*
> [perf@five ~]$ getcap bin/perf
> bin/perf = cap_ipc_lock,cap_sys_ptrace,cap_syslog,38+ep
> [perf@five ~]$
> [perf@five ~]$ perf top --stdio
>
>
> PerfTop: 652 irqs/sec kernel:73.8% exact: 99.7% lost: 0/0 drop: 0/0 [4000Hz cycles:u], (all, 12 CPUs)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 13.03% [kernel] [k] module_get_kallsym
> 5.25% [kernel] [k] kallsyms_expand_symbol.constprop.0
> 5.00% libc-2.30.so [.] __GI_____strtoull_l_internal
> 4.41% [kernel] [k] memcpy
> 3.42% [kernel] [k] vsnprintf
> 2.98% perf [.] map__process_kallsym_symbol
> 2.86% [kernel] [k] format_decode
> 2.73% [kernel] [k] number
> 2.70% perf [.] rb_next
> 2.59% perf [.] maps__split_kallsyms
> 2.54% [kernel] [k] string_nocheck
> 1.90% libc-2.30.so [.] _IO_getdelim
> 1.86% [kernel] [k] __x86_indirect_thunk_rax
> 1.53% libc-2.30.so [.] _int_malloc
> 1.48% libc-2.30.so [.] __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms
> 1.40% [kernel] [k] clear_page_rep
> 1.07% perf [.] rb_insert_color
> 1.01% libc-2.30.so [.] _IO_feof
> 0.99% perf [.] __dso__load_kallsyms
> 0.98% [kernel] [k] s_next
> 0.96% perf [.] __rblist__findnew
> 0.95% [kernel] [k] strlen
> 0.95% perf [.] arch__symbols__fixup_end
> 0.94% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4af
> 0.94% perf [.] symbol__new
> 0.89% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4a0
> 0.86% [kernel] [k] seq_read
> 0.81% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4ab
> 0.80% perf [.] __symbols__insert
> 0.73% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4a7
> 0.67% [kernel] [k] s_show
> 0.66% libc-2.30.so [.] __libc_calloc
> 0.61% libpixman-1.so.0.38.4 [.] 0x000000000006f4bb
> 0.59% [kernel] [k] get_page_from_freelist
> 0.59% perf [.] memcpy@plt
> 0.58% perf [.] eprintf
> exiting.
> [perf@five ~]$
>
> There is still something strange in here, the event is cycles:u (see at
> the PerfTop line, but it is getting kernel samples :-\
So running with 'perf top --stdio -vv 2> /tmp/output' I see we try
create three events, the first is some capability querying, then we try
to determine the max precision level, but continue with
attr.exclude_kernel=1, which shouldn't be the case, perhaps we're seeing
that it is not the root in the tooling part, and end up setting that to
1 as, previously, we knew it would fail, so we should switch to checking
if we have cap_perfmon too, will check that:
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
type 1
size 120
config 0x9
watermark 1
sample_id_all 1
bpf_event 1
{ wakeup_events, wakeup_watermark } 1
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
size 120
{ sample_period, sample_freq } 4000
sample_type IP|TID|TIME|CPU|PERIOD
read_format ID
disabled 1
inherit 1
exclude_kernel 1
mmap 1
comm 1
freq 1
task 1
precise_ip 3
sample_id_all 1
exclude_guest 1
mmap2 1
comm_exec 1
ksymbol 1
bpf_event 1
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
perf_event_attr:
size 120
{ sample_period, sample_freq } 4000
sample_type IP|TID|TIME|CPU|PERIOD
read_format ID
disabled 1
inherit 1
exclude_kernel 1
mmap 1
comm 1
freq 1
task 1
precise_ip 2
sample_id_all 1
exclude_guest 1
mmap2 1
comm_exec 1
ksymbol 1
bpf_event 1
------------------------------------------------------------
But then, even with that attr.exclude_kernel set to 1 we _still_ get
kernel samples, which looks like another bug, now trying with strace,
which leads us to another rabbit hole:
[perf@five ~]$ strace -e perf_event_open -o /tmp/out.put perf top --stdio
Error:
You may not have permission to collect system-wide stats.
Consider tweaking /proc/sys/kernel/perf_event_paranoid,
which controls use of the performance events system by
unprivileged users (without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN).
The current value is 2:
-1: Allow use of (almost) all events by all users
Ignore mlock limit after perf_event_mlock_kb without CAP_IPC_LOCK
>= 0: Disallow ftrace function tracepoint by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
Disallow raw tracepoint access by users without CAP_SYS_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
>= 1: Disallow CPU event access by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
>= 2: Disallow kernel profiling by users without CAP_PERFMON or CAP_SYS_ADMIN
To make this setting permanent, edit /etc/sysctl.conf too, e.g.:
kernel.perf_event_paranoid = -1
[perf@five ~]$
If I remove that strace -e ... from the front, 'perf top' is back
working as a non-cap_sys_admin user, just with cap_perfmon.
- Arnaldo
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-07 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 118+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-02 8:42 [PATCH v8 00/12] Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:45 ` [PATCH v8 01/12] capabilities: introduce CAP_PERFMON to kernel and user space Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:45 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] capabilities: Introduce " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:46 ` [PATCH v8 02/12] perf/core: open access to the core for CAP_PERFMON privileged process Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:46 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] perf/core: Open " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:47 ` [PATCH v8 03/12] perf/core: open access to probes " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:47 ` [PATCH v8 04/12] perf tool: extend Perf tool with CAP_PERFMON capability support Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-03 11:08 ` Jiri Olsa
2020-04-03 11:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jiri Olsa
2020-04-03 13:08 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-03 13:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-04 2:18 ` Namhyung Kim
2020-04-04 2:18 ` [Intel-gfx] " Namhyung Kim
2020-04-04 8:18 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-04 8:18 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] perf tools: Support CAP_PERFMON capability tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:48 ` [PATCH v8 05/12] drm/i915/perf: open access for CAP_PERFMON privileged process Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] drm/i915/perf: Open " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:48 ` [PATCH v8 06/12] trace/bpf_trace: open " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] trace/bpf_trace: Open " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:49 ` [PATCH v8 07/12] powerpc/perf: open " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:50 ` [PATCH v8 08/12] parisc/perf: " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:50 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:51 ` [PATCH v8 09/12] drivers/perf: " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:51 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] drivers/perf: Open " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:53 ` [PATCH v8 10/12] drivers/oprofile: open " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:53 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] drivers/oprofile: Open " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:54 ` [PATCH v8 11/12] doc/admin-guide: update perf-security.rst with CAP_PERFMON information Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] doc/admin-guide: Update " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:54 ` [PATCH v8 12/12] doc/admin-guide: update kernel.rst " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 8:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 14:10 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-05 14:10 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-05 14:41 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 14:41 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 14:54 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 14:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 15:05 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-05 15:05 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-05 15:51 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-05 15:51 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-22 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " tip-bot2 for Alexey Budankov
2020-04-02 9:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability (rev5) Patchwork
2020-04-02 10:02 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2020-04-03 11:24 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2020-04-05 16:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability (rev6) Patchwork
2020-04-07 14:30 ` [PATCH v8 00/12] Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 14:30 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 14:35 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 14:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 14:54 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 14:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 16:36 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 16:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 16:40 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 16:40 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 17:17 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 17:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 16:52 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 16:52 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 17:02 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 17:02 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 17:32 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 17:32 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-04-07 16:56 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2020-04-07 16:56 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 17:23 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-07 17:23 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-04-22 19:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability (rev18) Patchwork
2020-04-22 19:43 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2020-07-10 13:31 ` [PATCH v8 00/12] Introduce CAP_PERFMON to secure system performance monitoring and observability Ravi Bangoria
2020-07-10 13:31 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ravi Bangoria
2020-07-10 14:30 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-07-10 14:30 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-07-10 17:09 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-10 17:09 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-13 9:48 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-07-13 9:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-07-13 12:17 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-13 12:17 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-13 12:37 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-07-13 12:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-07-13 18:51 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-13 18:51 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-14 10:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-14 10:59 ` [Intel-gfx] " Peter Zijlstra
2020-07-14 15:27 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-14 15:27 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-21 13:06 ` Alexey Budankov
2020-07-21 13:06 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alexey Budankov
2020-07-22 11:30 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-07-22 11:30 ` [Intel-gfx] " Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200407165643.GD12003@kernel.org \
--to=arnaldo.melo@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=ilubashe@akamai.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.