On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:15:01PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> It's also worth noting that fine-grained control via a scoped mechanism
> would likely only be used to implement *more restrictions* on Android,
> not to make the feature less aggressive.
> It's desirable for perf events to be disable
On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 07:26 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>
> But self profiling JITs would be useful for non-developers, on Android
> (anywhere, really), and for that it would require being able to at
> least, well, self profile, using sys_perf_event_open() by a normal
> process, limited
On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 10:41 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:54:33AM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 14:44 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > It's also my understanding that for Android, perf_event_paranoid
> > > is
> > > lowered when the user enables devel
Em Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:15:01PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> > It's also worth noting that fine-grained control via a scoped mechanism
> > would likely only be used to implement *more restrictions* on Android,
> > not to make t
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:15:01PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> It's also worth noting that fine-grained control via a scoped
> mechanism would likely only be used to implement *more restrictions*
> on Android, not to make the feature less aggressive. It's desirable
> for perf events to be disabled
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:54:33AM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 14:44 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > It's also my understanding that for Android, perf_event_paranoid is
> > lowered when the user enables developer mode (rather than only when an
> > external debugger is attached
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 07:26:02AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:15:01PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> > > It's also worth noting that fine-grained control via a scoped mechanism
> > > would
On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 13:48 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Mark Rutland
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Attempt to revive discussions below...
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:45:46AM -0700, Jeff Vander Stoep wrote:
> > > When kernel.perf_event_paranoid is set to 3 (or gre
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attempt to revive discussions below...
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:45:46AM -0700, Jeff Vander Stoep wrote:
>> When kernel.perf_event_paranoid is set to 3 (or greater), disallow
>> all access to performance events by users without CA
On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 14:44 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attempt to revive discussions below...
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:45:46AM -0700, Jeff Vander Stoep wrote:
> > When kernel.perf_event_paranoid is set to 3 (or greater), disallow
> > all access to performance events by users witho
Hi,
Attempt to revive discussions below...
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 07:45:46AM -0700, Jeff Vander Stoep wrote:
> When kernel.perf_event_paranoid is set to 3 (or greater), disallow
> all access to performance events by users without CAP_SYS_ADMIN.
>
> This new level of restriction is intended to r
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Jeff Vander Stoep wrote:
> When kernel.perf_event_paranoid is set to 3 (or greater), disallow
> all access to performance events by users without CAP_SYS_ADMIN.
>
> This new level of restriction is intended to reduce the attack
> surface of the kernel. Perf is a va
12 matches
Mail list logo
