From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 10/13] tracing/wprobe: Add set_wprobe and clear_wprobe event triggers
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 14:58:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260914145845.1D9D21F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <178939029574.94750.11636803595861231046.stgit@devnote2>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 5 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Missing RCU synchronization in the error path of wprobe trigger registration leads to a Use-After-Free of hardware breakpoint perf_event structures.
- [High] Hardware breakpoint addresses are not updated for offline CPUs, leading to stale addresses when CPUs come online.
- [Medium] The 'count' parameter is decremented on trigger evaluation misses, causing the trigger to exhaust its count without actually modifying the watchpoint.
- [Medium] The wprobe event permanently leaks as enabled when the trigger is unregistered because `EVENT_FILE_FL_SOFT_DISABLED_BIT` is manually cleared.
- [Low] A field named 'unlimited' is silently ignored by `clear_wprobe` if no count keyword is provided.
--
commit 146ca411781d7203b266aa3745d30641c87b97d2
Author: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
tracing/wprobe: Add set_wprobe and clear_wprobe event triggers
Add set_wprobe and clear_wprobe event triggers to dynamically attach
and detach hardware breakpoint address monitoring based on event field
contents.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/59637b96946653393a7ad3c7de094094796b39c2.1785067572.git.wangjinchao600@gmail.com/
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
> index 9c6100b63e8d9..55a201504bb0b 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_wprobe.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -231,6 +303,12 @@ static struct trace_wprobe *alloc_trace_wprobe(const char *group,
>
> +static void wprobe_work_func(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct trace_wprobe *tw = container_of(work, struct trace_wprobe, work);
> +
> + on_each_cpu(wprobe_smp_update_func, tw, true);
[Severity: High]
Could this leave hardware breakpoints with stale addresses on offline CPUs?
on_each_cpu() only broadcasts to currently online CPUs, so offline CPUs
won't execute trace_wprobe_update_local(). When an offline CPU comes
online, won't the perf event core reinstall the hardware breakpoint using
the old, stale address since it wasn't updated here?
[ ... ]
> @@ -773,3 +866,538 @@ static __init int init_wprobe_trace(void)
[ ... ]
> +static void wprobe_trigger(struct event_trigger_data *data,
> + struct trace_buffer *buffer, void *rec,
> + struct ring_buffer_event *event)
> +{
> + struct wprobe_trigger_data *wprobe_data = data->private_data;
> + struct trace_wprobe *tw = wprobe_data->tw;
> + unsigned long addr = 0, flags;
> + bool changed = false;
[ ... ]
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&tw->lock, flags);
> +
> + if (!wprobe_data->clear) {
> + if (!trace_wprobe_is_valid_addr(addr, tw->len)) {
> + atomic_inc(&tw->missed);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + if (tw->addr == WPROBE_DEFAULT_CLEAR_ADDRESS) {
> + /* Skip if a previous work is still propagating the address */
> + if (atomic_read(&tw->work_pending)) {
> + atomic_inc(&tw->missed);
> + goto out;
> + }
> + WRITE_ONCE(tw->addr, addr);
> + changed = true;
> + clear_bit(EVENT_FILE_FL_SOFT_DISABLED_BIT, &wprobe_data->file->flags);
[Severity: Medium]
Does manually clearing EVENT_FILE_FL_SOFT_DISABLED_BIT cause the event to leak
as enabled?
When the trigger is unregistered, wprobe_trigger_free() calls
trace_event_enable_disable(file, 0, 1). Because the soft-disabled bit was
cleared here, won't the core event logic skip the unregister step, leaving
the wprobe tracepoint permanently enabled in the kernel?
[ ... ]
> +static int wprobe_trigger_cmd_parse(struct event_command *cmd_ops,
> + struct trace_event_file *file,
> + char *glob, char *cmd,
> + char *param_and_filter)
> +{
[ ... ]
> + } else if (param && (isalpha(param[0]) || param[0] == '_')) {
> + if (strncmp(param, "count=", 6) != 0 &&
> + strcmp(param, "unlimited") != 0) {
[Severity: Low]
Is this intended to skip fields named "unlimited"?
If a user configures a clear_wprobe trigger on an event that happens to have
a field named "unlimited", this parser matches the keyword and skips parsing
it as a field, which defaults to an unconditional clear action.
[ ... ]
> +static int wprobe_register_trigger(char *glob,
> + struct event_trigger_data *data,
> + struct trace_event_file *file)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_held(&event_mutex);
> +
> + /* The same wprobe is not accept on the same file (event) */
> + if (wprobe_trigger_find_same(data, file))
> + return -EEXIST;
> +
> + if (data->cmd_ops->init) {
> + ret = data->cmd_ops->init(data);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + list_add_rcu(&data->list, &file->triggers);
> +
> + update_cond_flag(file);
> + ret = trace_event_trigger_enable_disable(file, 1);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + list_del_rcu(&data->list);
> + update_cond_flag(file);
> + if (data->cmd_ops->free)
> + data->cmd_ops->free(data);
> + }
[Severity: High]
Does this error path need RCU synchronization?
If trace_event_trigger_enable_disable() fails, list_del_rcu() is called
without a subsequent synchronize_rcu(). The cmd_ops->free callback
(wprobe_trigger_free) will then synchronously disable the wprobe, which
frees the tw->bp_event array.
Could a concurrent tracepoint reader still observe the trigger data,
execute wprobe_trigger(), and dereference the freed tw->bp_event via
this_cpu_ptr() inside trace_wprobe_update_local()?
[ ... ]
> +static struct event_command trigger_wprobe_set_cmd = {
> + .name = SET_WPROBE_STR,
> + .trigger_type = ETT_EVENT_WPROBE,
> + /* This triggers after when the event is recorded. */
> + .flags = EVENT_CMD_FL_NEEDS_REC,
> + .parse = wprobe_trigger_cmd_parse,
> + .reg = wprobe_register_trigger,
> + .unreg = wprobe_unregister_trigger,
> + .set_filter = set_trigger_filter,
> + .trigger = wprobe_trigger,
> + .count_func = event_trigger_count,
[Severity: Medium]
Will this unconditionally exhaust the trigger's count parameter even on misses?
Because .count_func is set to event_trigger_count, the count is decremented
before wprobe_trigger() runs. If the trigger fails its implicit checks inside
wprobe_trigger() (such as checking if the field matches the watched address),
the count has already been consumed.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/178939017565.94750.9431053336761330458.stgit@devnote2?part=10
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-14 14:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-14 12:49 [PATCH v16 00/13] tracing: wprobe: x86: Add wprobe for watchpoint Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 12:49 ` [PATCH v16 01/13] x86/mce: Fix hardware debug register corruption on task migration Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 13:04 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:49 ` [PATCH v16 02/13] KVM: x86: Prevent host DR7 debug register leak into guest OS on NMI Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 13:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 14:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-16 23:45 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2026-09-14 12:50 ` [PATCH v16 03/13] x86/hw_breakpoints: Make DR7 updates NMI safe Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 13:31 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:50 ` [PATCH v16 04/13] x86/hw_breakpoints: Add arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() API Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 13:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:50 ` [PATCH v16 05/13] HWBP: Add modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() API Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 13:52 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:50 ` [PATCH v16 06/13] tracing/wprobe: Add wprobe (watchpoint probe) trace event support Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 14:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:50 ` [PATCH v16 07/13] x86: hw_breakpoint: Add a kconfig to clarify when a breakpoint fires Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 14:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:51 ` [PATCH v16 08/13] selftests: tracing: Add a basic testcase for wprobe Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 14:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:51 ` [PATCH v16 09/13] selftests: tracing: Add syntax " Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 14:35 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:51 ` [PATCH v16 10/13] tracing/wprobe: Add set_wprobe and clear_wprobe event triggers Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 14:58 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-14 12:51 ` [PATCH v16 11/13] selftests: tracing: Add wprobe trigger testcase Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 15:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:51 ` [PATCH v16 12/13] tracing/wprobe: Support BTF typecast in fetchargs Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 15:12 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-14 12:52 ` [PATCH v16 13/13] tracing/wprobe: Support BTF struct offset resolution in set_wprobe trigger Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-14 15:19 ` 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=20260914145845.1D9D21F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).