Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 24 11月, 2016 31 次提交
  3. 23 11月, 2016 6 次提交
  5. 22 11月, 2016 3 次提交
    • P
      perf/x86/intel/uncore: Allow only a single PMU/box within an events group · 033ac60c
      由 Peter Zijlstra 提交于 
      Group validation expects all events to be of the same PMU; however
is_uncore_pmu() is too wide, it matches _all_ uncore events, even
across PMUs.

This triggers failure when we group different events from different
uncore PMUs, like:

  perf stat -vv -e '{uncore_cbox_0/config=0x0334/,uncore_qpi_0/event=1/}' -a sleep 1

Fix is_uncore_pmu() by only matching events to the box at hand.

Note that generic code; ran after this step; will disallow this
mixture of PMU events.
Reported-by: NJiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Tested-by: NJiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vince@deater.net>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161118125354.GQ3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      033ac60c
    • P
      perf/x86/intel: Cure bogus unwind from PEBS entries · b8000586
      由 Peter Zijlstra 提交于 
      Vince Weaver reported that perf_fuzzer + KASAN detects that PEBS event
unwinds sometimes do 'weird' things. In particular, we seemed to be
ending up unwinding from random places on the NMI stack.

While it was somewhat expected that the event record BP,SP would not
match the interrupt BP,SP in that the interrupt is strictly later than
the record event, it was overlooked that it could be on an already
overwritten stack.

Therefore, don't copy the recorded BP,SP over the interrupted BP,SP
when we need stack unwinds.

Note that its still possible the unwind doesn't full match the actual
event, as its entirely possible to have done an (I)RET between record
and interrupt, but on average it should still point in the general
direction of where the event came from. Also, it's the best we can do,
considering.

The particular scenario that triggered the bogus NMI stack unwind was
a PEBS event with very short period, upon enabling the event at the
tail of the PMI handler (FREEZE_ON_PMI is not used), it instantly
triggers a record (while still on the NMI stack) which in turn
triggers the next PMI. This then causes back-to-back NMIs and we'll
try and unwind the stack-frame from the last NMI, which obviously is
now overwritten by our own.
Analyzed-by: NJosh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Reported-by: NVince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: davej@codemonkey.org.uk <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
Cc: dvyukov@google.com <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: ca037701 ("perf, x86: Add PEBS infrastructure")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161117171731.GV3157@twins.programming.kicks-ass.netSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      b8000586
    • J
      perf/x86: Restore TASK_SIZE check on frame pointer · ae31fe51
      由 Johannes Weiner 提交于 
      The following commit:

  75925e1a ("perf/x86: Optimize stack walk user accesses")

... switched from copy_from_user_nmi() to __copy_from_user_nmi() with a manual
access_ok() check.

Unfortunately, copy_from_user_nmi() does an explicit check against TASK_SIZE,
whereas the access_ok() uses whatever the current address limit of the task is.

We are getting NMIs when __probe_kernel_read() has switched to KERNEL_DS, and
then see vmalloc faults when we access what looks like pointers into vmalloc
space:

  [] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 3685731 at arch/x86/mm/fault.c:435 vmalloc_fault+0x289/0x290
  [] CPU: 3 PID: 3685731 Comm: sh Tainted: G        W       4.6.0-5_fbk1_223_gdbf0f40 #1
  [] Call Trace:
  []  <NMI>  [<ffffffff814717d1>] dump_stack+0x4d/0x6c
  []  [<ffffffff81076e43>] __warn+0xd3/0xf0
  []  [<ffffffff81076f2d>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1d/0x20
  []  [<ffffffff8104a899>] vmalloc_fault+0x289/0x290
  []  [<ffffffff8104b5a0>] __do_page_fault+0x330/0x490
  []  [<ffffffff8104b70c>] do_page_fault+0xc/0x10
  []  [<ffffffff81794e82>] page_fault+0x22/0x30
  []  [<ffffffff81006280>] ? perf_callchain_user+0x100/0x2a0
  []  [<ffffffff8115124f>] get_perf_callchain+0x17f/0x190
  []  [<ffffffff811512c7>] perf_callchain+0x67/0x80
  []  [<ffffffff8114e750>] perf_prepare_sample+0x2a0/0x370
  []  [<ffffffff8114e840>] perf_event_output+0x20/0x60
  []  [<ffffffff8114aee7>] ? perf_event_update_userpage+0xc7/0x130
  []  [<ffffffff8114ea01>] __perf_event_overflow+0x181/0x1d0
  []  [<ffffffff8114f484>] perf_event_overflow+0x14/0x20
  []  [<ffffffff8100a6e3>] intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x1d3/0x490
  []  [<ffffffff8147daf7>] ? copy_user_enhanced_fast_string+0x7/0x10
  []  [<ffffffff81197191>] ? vunmap_page_range+0x1a1/0x2f0
  []  [<ffffffff811972f1>] ? unmap_kernel_range_noflush+0x11/0x20
  []  [<ffffffff814f2056>] ? ghes_copy_tofrom_phys+0x116/0x1f0
  []  [<ffffffff81040d1d>] ? x2apic_send_IPI_self+0x1d/0x20
  []  [<ffffffff8100411d>] perf_event_nmi_handler+0x2d/0x50
  []  [<ffffffff8101ea31>] nmi_handle+0x61/0x110
  []  [<ffffffff8101ef94>] default_do_nmi+0x44/0x110
  []  [<ffffffff8101f13b>] do_nmi+0xdb/0x150
  []  [<ffffffff81795187>] end_repeat_nmi+0x1a/0x1e
  []  [<ffffffff8147daf7>] ? copy_user_enhanced_fast_string+0x7/0x10
  []  [<ffffffff8147daf7>] ? copy_user_enhanced_fast_string+0x7/0x10
  []  [<ffffffff8147daf7>] ? copy_user_enhanced_fast_string+0x7/0x10
  []  <<EOE>>  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff8115d05e>] ? __probe_kernel_read+0x3e/0xa0

Fix this by moving the valid_user_frame() check to before the uaccess
that loads the return address and the pointer to the next frame.
Signed-off-by: NJohannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 75925e1a ("perf/x86: Optimize stack walk user accesses")
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
      ae31fe51