From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Eranian Stephane <eranian@google.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>,
Ananth Narayan <ananth.narayan@amd.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>,
Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>,
Falcon Thomas <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v5 10/18] perf/x86/intel: Allow LBR read helpers to operate on explicit stacks
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 09:05:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e7bb28e7-cf1a-44b3-9ce9-3e6ab228d34f@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029103857.GL1779021@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 10/29/2026 6:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 12:39:06PM +0800, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> index ee724b28d90c..63f0504f9d2a 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> @@ -105,7 +105,10 @@
>>
>> #define ARCH_LBR_CTL_MASK 0x7f000e
>>
>> -static void intel_pmu_lbr_filter(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc);
>> +static void intel_pmu_lbr_filter(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc,
>> + struct perf_branch_stack *lbr_stack,
>> + struct perf_branch_entry *lbr_entries,
>> + u64 *lbr_counters);
>>
>> static __always_inline bool is_lbr_call_stack_bit_set(u64 config)
>> {
>> @@ -741,10 +744,12 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all(void)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> -void intel_pmu_lbr_read_32(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>> +void intel_pmu_lbr_read_32(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc,
>> + struct perf_branch_stack *lbr_stack,
>> + struct perf_branch_entry *lbr_entries)
>> {
>> unsigned long mask = x86_pmu.lbr_nr - 1;
>> - struct perf_branch_entry *br = cpuc->lbr_entries;
>> + struct perf_branch_entry *br = lbr_entries;
>> u64 tos = intel_pmu_lbr_tos();
>> int i;
>>
>> @@ -775,11 +780,13 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_read_32(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>> * is the same as the linear address, allowing us to merge the LIP and EIP
>> * LBR formats.
>> */
>> -void intel_pmu_lbr_read_64(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>> +void intel_pmu_lbr_read_64(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc,
>> + struct perf_branch_stack *lbr_stack,
>> + struct perf_branch_entry *lbr_entries)
>> {
>> bool need_info = false, call_stack = false;
>> unsigned long mask = x86_pmu.lbr_nr - 1;
>> - struct perf_branch_entry *br = cpuc->lbr_entries;
>> + struct perf_branch_entry *br = lbr_entries;
>> u64 tos = intel_pmu_lbr_tos();
>> int i;
>> int out = 0;
> This makes no sense; why do you keep passing lbr_entries around when we
> have lbr_stack.entries[] ?
Yeah, that's actually what I did at the beginning. But sashiko raised the
warning below. :(
"
Does this trigger a CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS panic when intel_pmu_store_lbr()
is inlined?
The lbr_stack pointer points to a struct
perf_branch_stack embedded directly in struct cpu_hw_events. Because it
is an embedded value-type struct, the compiler considers its size to be
fixed (16 bytes), treating the trailing flexible array member entries[]
as having 0 elements.
Accessing lbr_stack->entries[i] where i >= 0 can trigger strict array
bounds violations under -fstrict-flex-arrays=3 and CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS.
"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-30 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 4:38 [Patch v5 00/18] perf/x86: Fix multiple LBR sampling issues Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 01/18] perf/x86: Disable LBR if x86_pmu.lbr_nr exceeds MAX_LBR_ENTRIES Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 5:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-29 9:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 9:56 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 0:45 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 02/18] perf/x86/intel: Validate LBR XSAVE state before updating LBR stack Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 9:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 10:09 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 03/18] perf/x86/amd/lbr: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 04/18] perf/x86/intel/lbr: " Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 05/18] perf/x86: Add lbr_enabled to track LBR state Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 06/18] perf/x86/amd: Avoid re-enabling PMU and LBR for BPF when disabled Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 5:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 07/18] perf/x86/intel: Add helper to enable PMU without LBR Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 08/18] perf/x86/intel: Avoid re-enabling PMU and LBR for BPF when disabled Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 09/18] perf/x86/intel: Keep LBR frozen throughout PMI handling Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 0:56 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 10/18] perf/x86/intel: Allow LBR read helpers to operate on explicit stacks Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 1:05 ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-10-30 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 9:35 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 11/18] perf/x86/intel: Use a dedicated LBR stack for BPF snapshotting Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 1:44 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 12/18] perf/x86/intel: Always snapshot live hardware LBR state for BPF Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 1:48 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 13/18] perf/x86/intel: Refresh LBR stack for non-PEBS LBR events if needed Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 1:54 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-30 9:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 9:56 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 14/18] perf/x86/intel: Account arch-PEBS in lbr_pebs_users Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 15/18] perf/x86/intel: Clear raw LBR counters in the LBR stack Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 16/18] perf/x86/intel: Refill LBR stack for LBR counter events in PMI handler Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 17/18] perf/x86/intel: Pass LBR stack size into store_lbr() Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 18/18] perf/core: Don't overwrite shared LBR stack depth Dapeng Mi
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=e7bb28e7-cf1a-44b3-9ce9-3e6ab228d34f@linux.intel.com \
--to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ananth.narayan@amd.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
--cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
--cc=zide.chen@intel.com \
/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