From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
To: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] perf: Fix uninitialized bitfields in perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields()
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2026 15:28:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260409142803.GS356832@e132581.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260318171706.2840512-3-puranjay@kernel.org>
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:16:56AM -0700, Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields() zeroes individual bitfields of struct
> perf_branch_entry but misses the new_type (4 bits) and priv (3 bits)
> fields. This means any code path that relies on this function to produce
> a clean entry may expose stale or uninitialised data in these fields to
> userspace.
>
> The function was introduced by commit bfe4daf850f4 ("perf/core: Add
> perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields() helper") specifically to "centralize
> the initialization to avoid missing a field in case more are added."
> Unfortunately, the commits that later added new_type and priv to struct
> perf_branch_entry only updated the UAPI header and did not update this
> clearing function.
>
> Zero new_type and priv alongside the other bitfields.
>
> Fixes: b190bc4ac9e6 ("perf: Extend branch type classification")
> Fixes: 5402d25aa571 ("perf: Capture branch privilege information")
> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 48d851fbd8ea..d7f39b7e9cda 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -1481,6 +1481,8 @@ static inline void perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields(struct perf_branch_entry *b
> br->cycles = 0;
> br->type = 0;
> br->spec = PERF_BR_SPEC_NA;
> + br->new_type = 0;
> + br->priv = 0;
> br->reserved = 0;
> }
We already know this does not work well. Instead, we can define a union
for bitfield and use memset to clear it, later we will not bother for
this kind of issue anymore.
struct perf_branch_entry {
...
union {
struct {
__u64 mispred : 1, /* target mispredicted */
predicted : 1, /* target predicted */
...
reserved : 31;
};
__u64 bitfields;
};
};
static inline void perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields(struct perf_branch_entry *br)
{
memset(&br->bitfields, 0, sizeof(br->bitfields));
}
Thanks,
Leo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-09 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-18 17:16 [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: Add BRBE support for bpf_get_branch_snapshot() Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-18 17:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] perf/arm_pmuv3: Fix NULL pointer dereference in armv8pmu_sched_task() Puranjay Mohan
2026-04-08 12:23 ` Usama Arif
2026-04-09 11:24 ` Leo Yan
2026-04-09 11:30 ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-18 17:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] perf: Fix uninitialized bitfields in perf_clear_branch_entry_bitfields() Puranjay Mohan
2026-04-09 14:28 ` Leo Yan [this message]
2026-04-09 16:28 ` Leo Yan
2026-03-18 17:16 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] perf/arm64: Add BRBE support for bpf_get_branch_snapshot() Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-18 17:16 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] selftests/bpf: Adjust wasted entries threshold for ARM64 BRBE Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-26 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: Add BRBE support for bpf_get_branch_snapshot() Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-26 11:01 ` Will Deacon
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=20260409142803.GS356832@e132581.arm.com \
--to=leo.yan@arm.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
--cc=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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