From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kan.liang@linux.intel.com
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ak@linux.intel.com, acme@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
luto@amacapital.net, eranian@google.com, namhyung@kernel.org,
robh@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6] perf: Reset the dirty counter to prevent the leak for an RDPMC task
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 21:18:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210510191811.GA21560@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1619115952-155809-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:25:52AM -0700, kan.liang@linux.intel.com wrote:
> - Add a new method check_leakage() to check and clear dirty counters
> to prevent potential leakage.
I really dislike adding spurious callbacks, also because indirect calls
are teh suck, but also because it pollutes the interface so.
That said, I'm not sure I actually like the below any better :/
---
arch/x86/events/core.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
arch/x86/events/perf_event.h | 1 +
include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 ++
kernel/events/core.c | 7 +++++-
4 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
index 8e509325c2c3..e650c4ab603a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/core.c
@@ -740,21 +740,26 @@ void x86_pmu_enable_all(int added)
}
}
-static inline int is_x86_event(struct perf_event *event)
+static inline bool is_x86_pmu(struct pmu *_pmu)
{
int i;
if (!is_hybrid())
- return event->pmu == &pmu;
+ return _pmu == &pmu;
for (i = 0; i < x86_pmu.num_hybrid_pmus; i++) {
- if (event->pmu == &x86_pmu.hybrid_pmu[i].pmu)
+ if (_pmu == &x86_pmu.hybrid_pmu[i].pmu)
return true;
}
return false;
}
+static inline int is_x86_event(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+ return is_x86_pmu(event->pmu);
+}
+
struct pmu *x86_get_pmu(unsigned int cpu)
{
struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = &per_cpu(cpu_hw_events, cpu);
@@ -1624,6 +1629,8 @@ static void x86_pmu_del(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
if (cpuc->txn_flags & PERF_PMU_TXN_ADD)
goto do_del;
+ __set_bit(event->hw.idx, cpuc->dirty);
+
/*
* Not a TXN, therefore cleanup properly.
*/
@@ -2472,6 +2479,31 @@ static int x86_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
return err;
}
+static void x86_pmu_clear_dirty_counters(void)
+{
+ struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
+ int i;
+
+ /* Don't need to clear the assigned counter. */
+ for (i = 0; i < cpuc->n_events; i++)
+ __clear_bit(cpuc->assign[i], cpuc->dirty);
+
+ if (bitmap_empty(cpuc->dirty, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX))
+ return;
+
+ for_each_set_bit(i, cpuc->dirty, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX) {
+ /* Metrics and fake events don't have corresponding HW counters. */
+ if (is_metric_idx(i) || (i == INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR))
+ continue;
+ else if (i >= INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED)
+ wrmsrl(MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_FIXED_CTR0 + (i - INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED), 0);
+ else
+ wrmsrl(x86_pmu_event_addr(i), 0);
+ }
+
+ bitmap_zero(cpuc->dirty, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX);
+}
+
static void x86_pmu_event_mapped(struct perf_event *event, struct mm_struct *mm)
{
if (!(event->hw.flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_RDPMC_ALLOWED))
@@ -2495,7 +2527,6 @@ static void x86_pmu_event_mapped(struct perf_event *event, struct mm_struct *mm)
static void x86_pmu_event_unmapped(struct perf_event *event, struct mm_struct *mm)
{
-
if (!(event->hw.flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_RDPMC_ALLOWED))
return;
@@ -2604,6 +2635,25 @@ static const struct attribute_group *x86_pmu_attr_groups[] = {
static void x86_pmu_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
{
static_call_cond(x86_pmu_sched_task)(ctx, sched_in);
+
+ /*
+ * If a new task has the RDPMC enabled, clear the dirty counters
+ * to prevent the potential leak.
+ */
+ if (sched_in && ctx && READ_ONCE(x86_pmu.attr_rdpmc) &&
+ current->mm && atomic_read(¤t->mm->context.perf_rdpmc_allowed))
+ x86_pmu_clear_dirty_counters();
+}
+
+bool arch_perf_needs_sched_in(struct pmu *pmu)
+{
+ if (!READ_ONCE(x86_pmu.attr_rdpmc))
+ return false;
+
+ if (!is_x86_pmu(pmu))
+ return false;
+
+ return current->mm && atomic_read(¤t->mm->context.perf_rdpmc_allowed);
}
static void x86_pmu_swap_task_ctx(struct perf_event_context *prev,
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h b/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
index 27fa85e7d4fd..d6003e08b055 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
@@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ struct cpu_hw_events {
*/
struct perf_event *events[X86_PMC_IDX_MAX]; /* in counter order */
unsigned long active_mask[BITS_TO_LONGS(X86_PMC_IDX_MAX)];
+ unsigned long dirty[BITS_TO_LONGS(X86_PMC_IDX_MAX)];
int enabled;
int n_events; /* the # of events in the below arrays */
diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index f5a6a2f069ed..8b5a88e93e3c 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -1597,6 +1597,8 @@ int perf_event_exit_cpu(unsigned int cpu);
#define perf_event_exit_cpu NULL
#endif
+extern bool __weak arch_perf_needs_sched_in(struct pmu *_pmu);
+
extern void __weak arch_perf_update_userpage(struct perf_event *event,
struct perf_event_mmap_page *userpg,
u64 now);
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 8c3abccaa612..9ae292c09cb0 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -3817,6 +3817,11 @@ static void cpu_ctx_sched_in(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx,
ctx_sched_in(ctx, cpuctx, event_type, task);
}
+bool __weak arch_perf_needs_sched_in(struct pmu *pmu)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+
static void perf_event_context_sched_in(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
struct task_struct *task)
{
@@ -3851,7 +3856,7 @@ static void perf_event_context_sched_in(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_FLEXIBLE);
perf_event_sched_in(cpuctx, ctx, task);
- if (cpuctx->sched_cb_usage && pmu->sched_task)
+ if (pmu->sched_task && (cpuctx->sched_cb_usage || arch_perf_needs_sched_in(pmu)))
pmu->sched_task(cpuctx->task_ctx, true);
perf_pmu_enable(pmu);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-10 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-22 18:25 [PATCH V6] perf: Reset the dirty counter to prevent the leak for an RDPMC task kan.liang
2021-05-10 19:18 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-05-10 20:29 ` Rob Herring
2021-05-11 17:59 ` Liang, Kan
2021-05-11 20:39 ` Rob Herring
2021-05-11 21:42 ` Liang, Kan
2021-05-12 7:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-05-12 14:09 ` Liang, Kan
2021-05-12 14:54 ` Rob Herring
2021-05-12 15:36 ` Liang, Kan
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=20210510191811.GA21560@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox