All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] perf mmap: Guard cpu__get_node() return in aio_bind()
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2026 23:56:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260605235626.BAD231F00893@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260605233837.1773732-2-acme@kernel.org>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [Medium] NULL pointer dereference in `perf_mmap__aio_free()` when memory allocation fails in `perf_mmap__aio_mmap()`.
- [Medium] Sign-extension out-of-bounds write vulnerability in `perf_mmap__setup_affinity_mask`.
--

commit 2a2adfec0327c3db4323154825d9029d39b512eb
Author: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>

perf mmap: Guard cpu__get_node() return in aio_bind()

This commit fixes a sign-extension out-of-bounds write in perf_mmap__aio_bind()
by assigning the return of cpu__get_node() to a signed integer first.
If the return value is less than zero, the function safely returns early
instead of performing out-of-bounds operations.

> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
> index b69f926d314b1..4404a99eee45f 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
> @@ -104,9 +104,15 @@ static int perf_mmap__aio_bind(struct mmap *map, int idx, struct perf_cpu cpu, i
>  	int err = 0;
>  
>  	if (affinity != PERF_AFFINITY_SYS && cpu__max_node() > 1) {
> +		int node;
> +
>  		data = map->aio.data[idx];
>  		mmap_len = mmap__mmap_len(map);
> -		node_index = cpu__get_node(cpu);
> +		node = cpu__get_node(cpu);
> +		/* -1 sign-extends to ULONG_MAX, wrapping bitmap_zalloc(0) and OOB __set_bit */
> +		if (node < 0)
> +			return 0;
> +		node_index = node;
>  		node_mask = bitmap_zalloc(node_index + 1);
>  		if (!node_mask) {
>  			pr_err("Failed to allocate node mask for mbind: error %m\n");

[Severity: Medium]
This is a pre-existing issue, but I noticed a similar sign-extension issue in
perf_mmap__setup_affinity_mask() that could cause an out-of-bounds write.

If map->core.cpu.cpu is -1 (for example, for a dummy CPU map created by perf
record -p <pid> --affinity cpu), wouldn't it be sign-extended to ULONG_MAX
when passed to __set_bit()?

tools/perf/util/mmap.c:perf_mmap__setup_affinity_mask() {
    ...
	if (mp->affinity == PERF_AFFINITY_NODE && cpu__max_node() > 1)
		build_node_mask(cpu__get_node(map->core.cpu), &map->affinity_mask);
	else if (mp->affinity == PERF_AFFINITY_CPU)
		__set_bit(map->core.cpu.cpu, map->affinity_mask.bits);
    ...
}


[Severity: Medium]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but while looking at the mmap code, I
noticed a potential NULL pointer dereference during error cleanup.

If memory allocation for map->aio.data fails in perf_mmap__aio_mmap(), the
function returns -1 while map->aio.nr_cblocks is already set.

During the cleanup sequence, perf_mmap__aio_munmap() unconditionally loops up
to map->aio.nr_cblocks:

tools/perf/util/mmap.c:perf_mmap__aio_munmap() {
    ...
	for (i = 0; i < map->aio.nr_cblocks; ++i)
		perf_mmap__aio_free(map, i);
    ...
}

Inside perf_mmap__aio_free(), the pointer offset is calculated and passed to
zfree():

tools/perf/util/mmap.c:perf_mmap__aio_free() {
	zfree(&(map->aio.data[idx]));
}

If map->aio.data is NULL, won't passing its evaluated offset to zfree()
cause a segmentation fault when __zfree() tries to free the invalid pointer?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260605233837.1773732-1-acme@kernel.org?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-05 23:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-05 23:38 [PATCHES v2 0/9] perf tools: Fix OOB writes, refcount bugs, and BUG_ON in mmap/stat/c2c/sched Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 1/9] perf mmap: Guard cpu__get_node() return in aio_bind() Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:56   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-06 12:29     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 2/9] perf stat: Bounds-check CPU index in topology aggregation callbacks Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 3/9] perf c2c: Bounds-check CPU and node IDs before bitmap and array access Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:54   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 4/9] perf c2c: Bounds-check CPU IDs in setup_nodes() topology loop Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 5/9] perf sched: Clean up idle_threads entry on init failure Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:56   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-06 15:46   ` David Ahern
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 6/9] perf sched: Use is_idle_sample() for idle thread runtime cast guard Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 7/9] perf sched: Fix thread reference leak in idle hist processing Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-05 23:56   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-06 15:47   ` David Ahern
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 8/9] perf sched: Use thread__put() in free_idle_threads() Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-06-06 15:49   ` David Ahern
2026-06-05 23:38 ` [PATCH 9/9] perf sched: Replace BUG_ON and add NULL checks in replay event helpers Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260605235626.BAD231F00893@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.