lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] perf, intel: Don't touch MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR from NMI context
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 19:36 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 09/12, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > Oleg and Sebastian found that touching MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR from NMI
> > context is problematic since the only way to change the various
> > unrelated bits in there is:
> >
> > debugctl = get_debugctlmsr()
> > /* frob flags in debugctl */
> > update_debugctlmsr(debugctl);
> >
> > Which is entirely unsafe if we prod at the MSR from NMI context.
> >
> > In particular the path that is responsible is:
> >
> > x86_pmu_handle_irq() (NMI handler)
> > x86_pmu_stop()
> > x86_pmu.disable -> intel_pmu_disable_event()
> > intel_pmu_lbr_disable()
> > __intel_pmu_lbr_disable()
> > wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR,... );
>
> Not only.
>
> x86_pmu_handle_irq() does intel_pmu_disable_all() and intel_pmu_enable_all(),
> this leads to intel_pmu_enable_bts() and intel_pmu_disable_bts().
>
> And those intel_pmu_*_bts() are also called by intel_pmu_disable_event()
> and intel_pmu_enable_event(), the latter is probably fine.

As written in the email to Stephane just now, the {dis,en}able_all()
things are symmetric and don't change the visible MSR state. But you're
right, I missed that BTS frobbed that MSR as well.

I'll have to see if there's a DS programming that effectively disables
the BTS nonsense.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-12 20:21    [W:0.113 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site