[PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Dapeng Mi]

Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
of the sample record.

Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().

Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
---

These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
"Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/

 tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
 #include <linux/compiler.h>
 #include <linux/zalloc.h>
+#include <linux/overflow.h>
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <inttypes.h>
 #include <unistd.h>
@@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
 				COPY_U64();
 		}
 	}
+
+#define CHECK_SIMD() \
+	do { \
+		if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
+			u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
+			u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
+			u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
+			if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
+				ret = -EFAULT; \
+				goto out_put; \
+			} \
+			header_len = 4;	\
+			nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
+			vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
+			nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
+			pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
+			if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
+			    check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
+			    check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
+			    check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
+			    check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
+			    nr > max_i - i) { \
+				ret = -EFAULT; \
+				goto out_put; \
+			} \
+		} \
+	} while (0)
+
 	if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
 		u64 abi;
 
@@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
 				ret = -EFAULT;
 				goto out_put;
 			}
+			CHECK_SIMD();
 			i += nr;
 		}
 	}
@@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
 				ret = -EFAULT;
 				goto out_put;
 			}
+			CHECK_SIMD();
 			i += nr;
 		}
 	}

base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 2/2] perf util: Explicitly include required headers

[Dapeng Mi]

Sashiko complains "the perf tool can be compiled with musl libc, which
enforces strict POSIX namespace separation and does not implicitly
include headers. Relying on implicit header inclusion can cause build
failures under musl."

Include the required headers explicitly to avoid such failures.

Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
---
 tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c           | 1 +
 tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c | 2 ++
 tools/perf/util/session.c                      | 5 +++++
 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c b/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
index 709fcfb077a2..e70393388fae 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
 #include <stdlib.h>
 #include <stdint.h>
 #include <string.h>
+#include <strings.h>
 #include <stdio.h>
 #include "util/debug.h"
 #include <dwarf-regs.h>
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c b/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
index fb6cf34f42f2..ea1d402b0893 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <string.h>
 #include <regex.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+#include <stdbool.h>
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/zalloc.h>
 
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/session.c b/tools/perf/util/session.c
index a5b596cd14be..04fba6fb02e8 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/session.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/session.c
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
 // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <stdbool.h>
+#include <string.h>
+#include <assert.h>
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <signal.h>
 #include <inttypes.h>
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf util: Explicitly include required headers

[sashiko-bot]

> Sashiko complains "the perf tool can be compiled with musl libc, which
> enforces strict POSIX namespace separation and does not implicitly
> include headers. Relying on implicit header inclusion can cause build
> failures under musl."
> 
> Include the required headers explicitly to avoid such failures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great!

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260915091112.333308-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com?part=2

Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf util: Explicitly include required headers

[Ian Rogers]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 2:18 AM Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Sashiko complains "the perf tool can be compiled with musl libc, which
> enforces strict POSIX namespace separation and does not implicitly
> include headers. Relying on implicit header inclusion can cause build
> failures under musl."
>
> Include the required headers explicitly to avoid such failures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>

Thanks,
Ian

> ---
>  tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c           | 1 +
>  tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c | 2 ++
>  tools/perf/util/session.c                      | 5 +++++
>  3 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c b/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
> index 709fcfb077a2..e70393388fae 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-regs-options.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>  #include <stdlib.h>
>  #include <stdint.h>
>  #include <string.h>
> +#include <strings.h>
>  #include <stdio.h>
>  #include "util/debug.h"
>  #include <dwarf-regs.h>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c b/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
> index fb6cf34f42f2..ea1d402b0893 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/perf-regs-arch/perf_regs_x86.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
>  #include <errno.h>
>  #include <string.h>
>  #include <regex.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/session.c b/tools/perf/util/session.c
> index a5b596cd14be..04fba6fb02e8 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/session.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/session.c
> @@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
>  // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +#include <stdio.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <assert.h>
>  #include <errno.h>
>  #include <signal.h>
>  #include <inttypes.h>
> --
> 2.34.1
>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[sashiko-bot]

> Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
> handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
> of the sample record.
> 
> Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great!

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260915091112.333308-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com?part=1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Mi, Dapeng]

Kindly ping ...

@Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?

If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
extra backporting. Thanks.


On 9/15/2026 5:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
> handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
> of the sample record.
>
> Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>
> These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
> "Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
>
>  tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>  #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
>  #include <linux/compiler.h>
>  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
> +#include <linux/overflow.h>
>  #include <errno.h>
>  #include <inttypes.h>
>  #include <unistd.h>
> @@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>  				COPY_U64();
>  		}
>  	}
> +
> +#define CHECK_SIMD() \
> +	do { \
> +		if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
> +			u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
> +			u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
> +			u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
> +			if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
> +				ret = -EFAULT; \
> +				goto out_put; \
> +			} \
> +			header_len = 4;	\
> +			nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
> +			vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
> +			nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
> +			pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
> +			if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
> +			    check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
> +			    check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
> +			    check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
> +			    check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
> +			    nr > max_i - i) { \
> +				ret = -EFAULT; \
> +				goto out_put; \
> +			} \
> +		} \
> +	} while (0)
> +
>  	if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
>  		u64 abi;
>  
> @@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>  				ret = -EFAULT;
>  				goto out_put;
>  			}
> +			CHECK_SIMD();
>  			i += nr;
>  		}
>  	}
> @@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>  				ret = -EFAULT;
>  				goto out_put;
>  			}
> +			CHECK_SIMD();
>  			i += nr;
>  		}
>  	}
>
> base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Ian Rogers]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Kindly ping ...
>
> @Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
> small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
> tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?
>
> If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
> extra backporting. Thanks.

Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>

> On 9/15/2026 5:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> > Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
> > handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
> > of the sample record.
> >
> > Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >
> > These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
> > "Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
> >
> >  tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> >  #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
> >  #include <linux/compiler.h>
> >  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
> > +#include <linux/overflow.h>
> >  #include <errno.h>
> >  #include <inttypes.h>
> >  #include <unistd.h>
> > @@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> >                               COPY_U64();
> >               }
> >       }
> > +
> > +#define CHECK_SIMD() \
> > +     do { \
> > +             if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
> > +                     u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
> > +                     u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
> > +                     u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
> > +                     if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
> > +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
> > +                             goto out_put; \
> > +                     } \
> > +                     header_len = 4; \
> > +                     nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
> > +                     vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
> > +                     nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
> > +                     pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
> > +                     if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
> > +                         check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
> > +                         check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
> > +                         check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
> > +                         check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
> > +                         nr > max_i - i) { \
> > +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
> > +                             goto out_put; \
> > +                     } \
> > +             } \
> > +     } while (0)
> > +
> >       if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
> >               u64 abi;
> >
> > @@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> >                               ret = -EFAULT;
> >                               goto out_put;
> >                       }
> > +                     CHECK_SIMD();
> >                       i += nr;
> >               }
> >       }
> > @@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> >                               ret = -EFAULT;
> >                               goto out_put;
> >                       }
> > +                     CHECK_SIMD();

nit: at the end of the function you could #undef CHECK_SIMD to make it
more explicit that the macro only makes sense within the function.

Thanks,
Ian

> >                       i += nr;
> >               }
> >       }
> >
> > base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Ian Rogers]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 9:21 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Kindly ping ...
> >
> > @Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
> > small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
> > tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?
> >
> > If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
> > extra backporting. Thanks.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>

Oh, another nit: there's a typo in the commit message subject: s/alsr/aslr/g.

Thanks,
Ian

> > On 9/15/2026 5:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> > > Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
> > > handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
> > > of the sample record.
> > >
> > > Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
> > > "Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
> > >
> > >  tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > > index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
> > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > >  #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
> > >  #include <linux/compiler.h>
> > >  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
> > > +#include <linux/overflow.h>
> > >  #include <errno.h>
> > >  #include <inttypes.h>
> > >  #include <unistd.h>
> > > @@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> > >                               COPY_U64();
> > >               }
> > >       }
> > > +
> > > +#define CHECK_SIMD() \
> > > +     do { \
> > > +             if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
> > > +                     u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
> > > +                     u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
> > > +                     u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
> > > +                     if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
> > > +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
> > > +                             goto out_put; \
> > > +                     } \
> > > +                     header_len = 4; \
> > > +                     nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
> > > +                     vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
> > > +                     nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
> > > +                     pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
> > > +                     if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
> > > +                         check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
> > > +                         check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
> > > +                         check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
> > > +                         check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
> > > +                         nr > max_i - i) { \
> > > +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
> > > +                             goto out_put; \
> > > +                     } \
> > > +             } \
> > > +     } while (0)
> > > +
> > >       if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
> > >               u64 abi;
> > >
> > > @@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> > >                               ret = -EFAULT;
> > >                               goto out_put;
> > >                       }
> > > +                     CHECK_SIMD();
> > >                       i += nr;
> > >               }
> > >       }
> > > @@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
> > >                               ret = -EFAULT;
> > >                               goto out_put;
> > >                       }
> > > +                     CHECK_SIMD();
>
> nit: at the end of the function you could #undef CHECK_SIMD to make it
> more explicit that the macro only makes sense within the function.
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
> > >                       i += nr;
> > >               }
> > >       }
> > >
> > > base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Mi, Dapeng]

On 9/22/2026 12:22 AM, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 9:21 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> Kindly ping ...
>>>
>>> @Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
>>> small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
>>> tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?
>>>
>>> If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
>>> extra backporting. Thanks.
>> Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
> Oh, another nit: there's a typo in the commit message subject: s/alsr/aslr/g.

Sure. :)


>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
>>> On 9/15/2026 5:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>>>> Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
>>>> handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
>>>> of the sample record.
>>>>
>>>> Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
>>>> "Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
>>>>
>>>>  tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>>> index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>>>>  #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
>>>>  #include <linux/compiler.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/overflow.h>
>>>>  #include <errno.h>
>>>>  #include <inttypes.h>
>>>>  #include <unistd.h>
>>>> @@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>>                               COPY_U64();
>>>>               }
>>>>       }
>>>> +
>>>> +#define CHECK_SIMD() \
>>>> +     do { \
>>>> +             if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
>>>> +                     u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
>>>> +                     u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
>>>> +                     u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
>>>> +                     if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
>>>> +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
>>>> +                             goto out_put; \
>>>> +                     } \
>>>> +                     header_len = 4; \
>>>> +                     nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
>>>> +                     vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
>>>> +                     nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
>>>> +                     pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
>>>> +                     if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
>>>> +                         check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
>>>> +                         check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
>>>> +                         check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
>>>> +                         check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
>>>> +                         nr > max_i - i) { \
>>>> +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
>>>> +                             goto out_put; \
>>>> +                     } \
>>>> +             } \
>>>> +     } while (0)
>>>> +
>>>>       if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
>>>>               u64 abi;
>>>>
>>>> @@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>>                               ret = -EFAULT;
>>>>                               goto out_put;
>>>>                       }
>>>> +                     CHECK_SIMD();
>>>>                       i += nr;
>>>>               }
>>>>       }
>>>> @@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>>                               ret = -EFAULT;
>>>>                               goto out_put;
>>>>                       }
>>>> +                     CHECK_SIMD();
>> nit: at the end of the function you could #undef CHECK_SIMD to make it
>> more explicit that the macro only makes sense within the function.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>>
>>>>                       i += nr;
>>>>               }
>>>>       }
>>>>
>>>> base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 09:22:11AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 9:21 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Kindly ping ...
> > >
> > > @Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
> > > small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
> > > tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?
> > >
> > > If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
> > > extra backporting. Thanks.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
> 
> Oh, another nit: there's a typo in the commit message subject: s/alsr/aslr/g.

Fixed.



Thanks, applied to perf-tools-next, for v7.4.

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf alsr: Add missing SIMD handling in aslr_tool__process_sample()

[Mi, Dapeng]

On 9/22/2026 12:21 AM, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> Kindly ping ...
>>
>> @Arnaldo, @Namhyung, @Ian, not sure if you have bandwidth to review this
>> small patchset which fixes the Sashiko found minor issues for the "Perf
>> tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling" patchset?
>>
>> If possible, it's better to be queued in this cycle, then we don't need
>> extra backporting. Thanks.
> Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
>
>> On 9/15/2026 5:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>>> Currently the SIMD register sampling is supported, but the corresponding
>>> handling is missed in aslr_tool__process_sample(). This can break parsing
>>> of the sample record.
>>>
>>> Add the missing SIMD register handling in aslr_tool__process_sample().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> These two patches fix Sashiko reported defects for the patchset:
>>> "Perf tools: Support eGPRs/SSP/SIMD registers sampling"
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260914014049.2061519-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
>>>
>>>  tools/perf/util/aslr.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>> index 027695d96779..a097084201a0 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/aslr.c
>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>>>  #include <internal/lib.h>  /* page_size */
>>>  #include <linux/compiler.h>
>>>  #include <linux/zalloc.h>
>>> +#include <linux/overflow.h>
>>>  #include <errno.h>
>>>  #include <inttypes.h>
>>>  #include <unistd.h>
>>> @@ -992,6 +993,34 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>                               COPY_U64();
>>>               }
>>>       }
>>> +
>>> +#define CHECK_SIMD() \
>>> +     do { \
>>> +             if (abi & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_SIMD) { \
>>> +                     u64 nr_vector, vec_qwords; \
>>> +                     u64 nr_pred, pred_qwords; \
>>> +                     u64 header_len, vec_len, pred_len, simd_len; \
>>> +                     if (CHECK_BOUNDS(nr + 4, nr + 4)) { \
>>> +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
>>> +                             goto out_put; \
>>> +                     } \
>>> +                     header_len = 4; \
>>> +                     nr_vector = in_array[i + nr]; \
>>> +                     vec_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 1]; \
>>> +                     nr_pred = in_array[i + nr + 2]; \
>>> +                     pred_qwords = in_array[i + nr + 3]; \
>>> +                     if (check_mul_overflow(nr_vector, vec_qwords, &vec_len) || \
>>> +                         check_mul_overflow(nr_pred, pred_qwords, &pred_len) || \
>>> +                         check_add_overflow(vec_len, pred_len, &simd_len) || \
>>> +                         check_add_overflow(header_len, simd_len, &simd_len) || \
>>> +                         check_add_overflow(nr, simd_len, &nr) || \
>>> +                         nr > max_i - i) { \
>>> +                             ret = -EFAULT; \
>>> +                             goto out_put; \
>>> +                     } \
>>> +             } \
>>> +     } while (0)
>>> +
>>>       if (orig_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
>>>               u64 abi;
>>>
>>> @@ -1007,6 +1036,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>                               ret = -EFAULT;
>>>                               goto out_put;
>>>                       }
>>> +                     CHECK_SIMD();
>>>                       i += nr;
>>>               }
>>>       }
>>> @@ -1061,6 +1091,7 @@ static int aslr_tool__process_sample(const struct perf_tool *tool,
>>>                               ret = -EFAULT;
>>>                               goto out_put;
>>>                       }
>>> +                     CHECK_SIMD();
> nit: at the end of the function you could #undef CHECK_SIMD to make it
> more explicit that the macro only makes sense within the function.

Sure. Thanks.


>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
>>>                       i += nr;
>>>               }
>>>       }
>>>
>>> base-commit: 91b0782fc9e9d2f0a40b5256146e014802fdbb36