Linux Perf Users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Dmitry Ilvokhin" <d@ilvokhin.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf record: Avoid overrunning the zstd output buffer
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 16:20:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260618162059.8B59B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7860259ac13e539dfb907489be29d0487d36aeb8.1781797544.git.d@ilvokhin.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:

New issues:
- [High] The patch introduces an overly strict buffer size check that causes compression to fail prematurely whenever less than `max_record_size` (~64KB) space remains.

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The safety bounds check added to `zstd_compress_stream_to_records` is bypassed on the first loop iteration, leaving the buffer vulnerable to overflow and integer underflow.
- [High] In `zstd_decompress_stream()`, the `output.dst` pointer is advanced while `output.pos` is improperly preserved, leading to out-of-bounds writes and corrupted output if the decompression loop executes more than once.
- [High] If `perf_mmap__push` processes the ring buffer in two chunks and the second chunk's compression fails, the reference to `map->core` acquired during the first chunk is leaked.
--

commit 09f418a2fa19ace0234b4443e193f65fb347ed8b
Author: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>

perf record: Avoid overrunning the zstd output buffer

This commit adds a bounds check in zstd_compress_stream_to_records() to
prevent writing past the end of the output buffer. It verifies if the
remaining buffer size is sufficient for a full record.

> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/zstd.c b/tools/perf/util/zstd.c
> index 1955fa2431d17..a0f6572ad2017 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/zstd.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/zstd.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -53,8 +53,14 @@ ssize_t zstd_compress_stream_to_records(struct zstd_data *data, void *dst, size_
>  	}
>  
>  	while (input.pos < input.size) {
> +		if (hdr_size &&
> +		    dst_size < hdr_size + max_record_size + sizeof(u64)) {

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but by gating the bounds check on
hdr_size, isn't the check bypassed on the very first loop iteration since
hdr_size is initialized to 0?

If dst_size is initially very small (which can legitimately happen in 
record__aio_pushfn() when calculating mmap__mmap_len(map) - aio->size), the 
code will unconditionally write the header and decrement dst_size.

Could this underflow dst_size to a massive positive value, bypassing
subsequent bounds checks and allowing ZSTD_compressStream() to write out of
bounds?

[Severity: High]
Does this check introduce an overly strict requirement that causes compression 
to fail prematurely?

By requiring dst_size < hdr_size + max_record_size + sizeof(u64), this 
condition unconditionally fails compression if the remaining buffer is less 
than the maximum record size (typically ~64KB).

In AIO mode, dst_size represents the remaining space in the AIO buffer, which
naturally dwindles. If a small chunk needs to be compressed and could fit in
the remaining space, wouldn't this check spuriously abort the compression and
render the last ~64KB of every buffer unusable?

> +			pr_err("failed to compress: output buffer too small\n");
> +			return -1;
> +		}
>  		record = dst;
>  		size = process_header(record, 0);
> +		hdr_size = size;
>  		compressed += size;
>  		dst += size;
>  		dst_size -= size;

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but looking at
zstd_decompress_stream() in the same file, is there an issue with how
output.pos is handled?

tools/perf/util/zstd.c:zstd_decompress_stream() {
    ...
    output.dst  = dst + output.pos;
    output.size = dst_size - output.pos;
    ...
}

The loop advances the destination pointer but fails to clear output.pos.

If the decompression loop executes more than once, will ZSTD start writing
at the new output.dst + output.pos, effectively skipping output.pos bytes
and corrupting the decompressed stream?

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the strict bounds check
introduced above make a memory leak in AIO mode more easily triggerable?

In tools/perf/builtin-record.c:record__aio_pushfn(), a reference to map->core 
is acquired on the first successful chunk:

tools/perf/builtin-record.c:record__aio_pushfn() {
    ...
    if (!aio->size) {
        perf_mmap__get(&map->core);
    }
    ...
}

If perf_mmap__push() processes the ring buffer in two chunks, and the
second chunk's compression fails (which happens more frequently now due
to the ~64KB bounds check), perf_mmap__push() aborts and passes the error
back to record__aio_push():

tools/perf/builtin-record.c:record__aio_push() {
    ...
    ret = perf_mmap__push(map, &aio, record__aio_pushfn);
    if (ret != 0)
        return ret;
    ...
}

Will this return immediately on failure and bypass the perf_mmap__put()
cleanup that occurs later, resulting in a leak of the map->core resource?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/cover.1781797544.git.d@ilvokhin.com?part=2

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-18 16:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-18 15:59 [PATCH 0/3] perf record: fix multi-record Zstd compression Dmitry Ilvokhin
2026-06-18 15:59 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf record: Fix multiple PERF_RECORD_COMPRESSED2 records per push Dmitry Ilvokhin
2026-06-18 16:26   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-18 15:59 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf record: Avoid overrunning the zstd output buffer Dmitry Ilvokhin
2026-06-18 16:20   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-18 15:59 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf record: Don't store raw data on zstd compression failure Dmitry Ilvokhin
2026-06-18 16:24   ` sashiko-bot

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=20260618162059.8B59B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=d@ilvokhin.com \
    --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