lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: suspicious RCU usage (perf)
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 05:52:43PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:16:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:03:04PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > Is there some path through sys_perf_open_event that might be
> > > > missing a capability check perhaps ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a question for Ingo, Peter or Jiri.
> >
> > Its not something I've looked at recently, git blames Jiri and fweisbec
> > for most of that code.
> >
> > Permission checks appear to live in
> > kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c:perf_trace_event_perm().
>
> Actually the following condition is weird:
>
> /* The ftrace function trace is allowed only for root. */
> if (ftrace_event_is_function(tp_event) &&
> perf_paranoid_kernel() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
>

That says: If its its a function-event and we're paranoid but we don't
have root, bail.

> We probably intended to do:
>
> /* The ftrace function trace is allowed only for root. */
> if (ftrace_event_is_function(tp_event) ||
> perf_paranoid_kernel() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
>
> Can somebody confirm?

That would always disallow function-events, no?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-08-30 18:21    [W:0.064 / U:0.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site