lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 1/2] perf/core: Use sysctl to turn on/off dropping leaked kernel samples
From
Date


On 6/15/2018 7:36 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 06:03:22PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>> When doing sampling, for example:
>>
>> perf record -e cycles:u ...
>>
>> On workloads that do a lot of kernel entry/exits we see kernel
>> samples, even though :u is specified. This is due to skid existing.
>>
>> This might be a security issue because it can leak kernel addresses even
>> though kernel sampling support is disabled.
>>
>> One patch "perf/core: Drop kernel samples even though :u is specified"
>> was posted in last year but it was reverted because it introduced a
>> regression issue that broke the rr-project, which used sampling
>> events to receive a signal on overflow. These signals were critical
>> to the correct operation of rr.
>>
>> See '6a8a75f32357 ("Revert "perf/core: Drop kernel samples even
>> though :u is specified"")' for detail.
>>
>> Now the idea is to use sysctl to control the dropping of leaked
>> kernel samples.
>>
>> /sys/devices/cpu/perf_allow_sample_leakage:
>>
>> 0 - default, drop the leaked kernel samples.
>> 1 - don't drop the leaked kernel samples.
>
> Does this need to be conditional at all?
>
> At least for sampling the GPRs, we could do something like below
> unconditionally, which seems sufficient for my test cases.
>
> Mark.
>
> ---->8----
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 67612ce359ad..79a21531d57c 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -6359,6 +6359,24 @@ perf_callchain(struct perf_event *event, struct pt_regs *regs)
> return callchain ?: &__empty_callchain;
> }
>
> +static struct pt_regs *perf_get_sample_regs(struct perf_event *event, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Due to interrupt latency (AKA "skid"), we may enter the kernel
> + * before taking an overflow, even if the PMU is only counting user
> + * events.
> + *
> + * If we're not counting kernel events, always use the user regs when
> + * sampling.
> + *
> + * TODO: how does this interact with guest sampling?
> + */
> + if (event->attr.exclude_kernel && !user_mode(regs))
> + return task_pt_regs(current);
> +
> + return regs;
> +}
> +
> void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> struct perf_sample_data *data,
> struct perf_event *event,
> @@ -6366,6 +6384,8 @@ void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> {
> u64 sample_type = event->attr.sample_type;
>
> + regs = perf_get_sample_regs(event, regs);
> +
> header->type = PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE;
> header->size = sizeof(*header) + event->header_size;
>
>

Hi Mark,

Thanks for providing the patch. I understand this approach.

In my opinion, the skid window is from counter overflow to interrupt
delivered. While if the skid window is too *big* (e.g. user -> kernel),
it should be not very useful. So personally, I'd prefer to drop the samples.

Thanks
Jin Yao

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-18 08:56    [W:0.981 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site