-
Alexander Shishkin authored
commit 8a58ddae upstream. So far, we tried to disallow grouping exclusive events for the fear of complications they would cause with moving between contexts. Specifically, moving a software group to a hardware context would violate the exclusivity rules if both groups contain matching exclusive events. This attempt was, however, unsuccessful: the check that we have in the perf_event_open() syscall is both wrong (looks at wrong PMU) and insufficient (group leader may still be exclusive), as can be illustrated by running: $ perf record -e '{intel_pt//,cycles}' uname $ perf record -e '{cycles,intel_pt//}' uname ultimately successfully. Furthermore, we are completely free to trigger the exclusivity violation by: perf -e '{cycles,intel_pt//}' -e '{intel_pt//,instructions}' even though the helpful perf record will not allow that, the ABI will. The warning later in the perf_event_open() path will also not trigger, because it's also wrong. Fix all this by validating the original group before moving, getting rid of broken safeguards and placing a useful one to perf_install_in_context(). Signed-off-by:
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by:
Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: <stable@vger.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@google.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> Cc: mathieu.poirier@linaro.org Cc: will.deacon@arm.com Fixes: bed5b25a ("perf: Add a pmu capability for "exclusive" events") Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190701110755.24646-1-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.comSigned-off-by:
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Signed-off-by:
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
421db878