Re: [PATCH 1/2] sparc64: Ensure perf can access user stacks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 12/24/2015 09:43 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Rob Gardner <rob.gardner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 21:16:06 -0700

When an interrupt (such as a perf counter interrupt) is delivered
while executing in user space, the trap entry code puts ASI_AIUS in
%asi so that copy_from_user() and copy_to_user() will access the
correct memory. But if a perf counter interrupt is delivered while the
cpu is already executing in kernel space, then the trap entry code
will put ASI_P in %asi, and this will prevent copy_from_user() from
reading any useful stack data in either of the perf_callchain_user_X
functions, and thus no user callgraph data will be collected for this
sample period. An additional problem is that a fault is guaranteed
to occur, and though it will be silently covered up, it wastes time
and could perturb state.

In perf_callchain_user(), we ensure that %asi contains ASI_AIUS
because we know for a fact that the subsequent calls to
copy_from_user() are intended to read the user's stack.

Signed-off-by: Rob Gardner <rob.gardner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dave Aldridge <david.j.aldridge@xxxxxxxxxx>
I applied this, but modified it slightly.

We have shorthand helpers "get_fs()" and "set_fs()" for doing this
kind of work, and as you can see in arch/sparc/kernel/process_64.c
and elsewhere this is the canonical way to adjust the %asi value in
these kinds of circumstances.

Also, set_fs() updates the thread's current_ds value properly.  Notice
that NGmemcpy.S uses the TI_CURRENT_DS value via the RESTORE_ASI()
macro.  So if that's not set properly, the %asi restore won't be done
properly.

Sorry I should have noted this in the log message, but we intentionally did not use get_fs() and set_fs() there because they are not safe to use in a "nested" interrupt context. n.b. get_fs() is not guaranteed to report a value consistent with %asi while we're executing the perf interrupt handler, because it may have interrupted kernel code where %asi is inconsistent with the thread_info current_ds value. This is common, e.g. right in NGmemcpy.

Rob




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [DCCP]     [Linux ARM Development]     [Linux]     [Photo]     [Yosemite Help]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux x86_64]     [Linux Hams]

  Powered by Linux