BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 3/4] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Reset the cached LBR stack in intel_pmu_lbr_reset()
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 16:47:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3308c42-e0f0-4377-b75f-5b4d318f14fb@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <sashiko-outbox-176747@kernel.org>


On 10/19/2026 3:30 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] perf/x86/intel/lbr: stale lbr_stack.nr in intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave()
> --
>
> commit 93eb502f5c2972255761d542db115fed920f52bd
> Author: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>
> perf/x86/intel/lbr: Reset the cached LBR stack in intel_pmu_lbr_reset()
>
> This commit resets cpuc->lbr_stack.nr in intel_pmu_lbr_reset() and skips
> calling intel_pmu_store_lbr() in intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave() when
> XFEATURE_MASK_LBR is not set in xsave->header.xfeatures.
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> index 0b446d8912e4e..249db12e927ed 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> @@ -193,6 +193,8 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_reset(void)
>>  {
>>  	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>>  
>> +	cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;
>> +
>>  	if (!x86_pmu.lbr_nr)
>>  		return;
>>  
>> @@ -1012,7 +1014,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>>  	}
>>  	xsaves(&xsave->xsave, XFEATURE_MASK_LBR);
>>  
>> -	intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, xsave->lbr.entries);
>> +	if (xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_LBR)
>> +		intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, xsave->lbr.entries);
>>  }
>>  
>>  void intel_pmu_lbr_read(void)
> [Severity: High]
> When xsaves() sees the hardware LBR state in its INIT configuration, the
> XSAVE init optimization clears XFEATURE_MASK_LBR in
> xsave->header.xfeatures without writing to xsave->lbr.entries.
>
> If intel_pmu_store_lbr() is skipped here without resetting
> cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0, can cpuc->lbr_stack.nr and cpuc->lbr_entries[]
> retain stale branch entries whenever the hardware LBR state enters the
> INIT configuration without going through intel_pmu_lbr_reset()?
>
> For example, during a context switch in LBR call-stack mode,
> __intel_pmu_lbr_restore() restores the incoming task's LBR state without
> calling intel_pmu_lbr_reset():
>
> arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c:__intel_pmu_lbr_restore() {
> 	if (!has_lbr_callstack_users(ctx) ||
> 	    task_context_opt(ctx)->lbr_stack_state == LBR_NONE) {
> 		intel_pmu_lbr_reset();
> 		return;
> 	}
> 	...
> 	x86_pmu.lbr_restore(ctx);
>
> 	task_context_opt(ctx)->lbr_stack_state = LBR_NONE;
> }
>
> If the previous task populated cpuc->lbr_stack.nr > 0 and the incoming
> task had 0 branches when scheduled out (so xrstors() restores the hardware
> LBR state to the INIT state), a PMI or branch snapshot in the new task
> before new branches are recorded will see !(xsave->header.xfeatures &
> XFEATURE_MASK_LBR) and leave the previous task's cpuc->lbr_stack.nr and
> cpuc->lbr_entries[] in place.
>
> The same situation can also occur within a single task when:
> - RET instructions in call-stack mode pop all hardware LBR entries back to
>   the INIT state after an earlier PMI populated cpuc->lbr_stack.nr,
> - a deep C-state resets the hardware Arch LBR registers to the INIT state
>   (x86_pmu.lbr_deep_c_reset) without calling intel_pmu_lbr_reset(), or
> - intel_pmu_store_pebs_lbrs() populates cpuc->lbr_stack.nr from a PEBS
>   record while the hardware LBR registers are in the INIT state.
>
> In addition to leaking or repeating stale branch entries,
> intel_pmu_lbr_read() then runs intel_pmu_lbr_filter(cpuc) a second time on
> the stale cpuc->lbr_entries[], where e->type already holds a converted
> PERF_BR_* value rather than a raw ARCH_LBR_BR_TYPE_* value, indexing
> arch_lbr_br_type_map[] with the wrong value.
>
> Should intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave() clear cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0 when
> !(xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_LBR)?
>
> 	if (xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_LBR)
> 		intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, xsave->lbr.entries);
> 	else
> 		cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;

Good catch. Would follow the suggestion. Thanks.


>

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-19  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-19  7:08 [Patch v3 0/4] perf/x86: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries Dapeng Mi
2026-10-19  7:08 ` [Patch v3 1/4] perf/x86: Clamp x86_pmu.lbr_nr to MAX_LBR_ENTRIES Dapeng Mi
2026-10-19  7:28   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19  8:44     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-19  7:08 ` [Patch v3 2/4] perf/x86/amd/lbr: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries Dapeng Mi
2026-10-19  7:08 ` [Patch v3 3/4] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Reset the cached LBR stack in intel_pmu_lbr_reset() Dapeng Mi
2026-10-19  7:30   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19  8:47     ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-10-19  7:08 ` [Patch v3 4/4] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries Dapeng Mi
2026-10-19  7:35   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19  9:29     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-19  9:31   ` Mi, Dapeng

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=b3308c42-e0f0-4377-b75f-5b4d318f14fb@linux.intel.com \
    --to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox