Linux Perf Users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v2 5/9] perf/x86/intel: Drop LBR entries whose privilege level mismatches br_sel
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 17:40:29 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2fc34158-debd-467c-b8fe-b9c04df2a19e@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260609052128.811C51F00893@smtp.kernel.org>


On 6/9/2026 1:21 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
>
> Pre-existing issues:
> - [High] The kernel address leak in LBR stacks fixed here for Intel PMUs still exists in AMD PMUs (both AMD LBR and AMD BRS), allowing KASLR bypass.
> --
>
> commit 955fb4f61b3305a8e4972ee94bb41e752a3dd25c
> Author: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>
> perf/x86/intel: Drop LBR entries whose privilege level mismatches br_sel
>
> This commit fixes an issue where kernel branch addresses could be exposed
> to user space in user-only branch stacks. It extends the software filter
> in intel_pmu_lbr_filter() to validate both the from and to addresses
> against the requested branch privilege filter.
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> index 171fdf1962ade..9a63209cc7878 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -1246,8 +1246,16 @@ intel_pmu_lbr_filter(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>>  				type |= X86_BR_NO_TX;
>>  		}
>>  
>> -		/* if type does not correspond, then discard */
>> -		if (type == X86_BR_NONE || (br_sel & type) != type) {
>> +		from_plm = kernel_ip(from) ? X86_BR_KERNEL : X86_BR_USER;
>> +		/*
>> +		 * If type does not correspond, then discard.
>> +		 * Especially filter out the entries whose from or to address is
>> +		 * a kernel address while only X86_BR_USER is set. This prevents
>> +		 * kernel address from being leaked into a user-space-only LBR stack.
>> +		 */
>> +		if (type == X86_BR_NONE || (br_sel & type) != type ||
>> +		    (!(br_sel & X86_BR_KERNEL) && (from_plm & X86_BR_KERNEL)) ||
>> +		    (!(br_sel & X86_BR_USER) && (from_plm & X86_BR_USER))) {
>>  			cpuc->lbr_entries[i].from = 0;
>>  			compress = true;
>>  		}
> [Severity: High]
> This is a pre-existing issue, but does the AMD PMU code suffer from this
> same vulnerability?
>
> Looking at the AMD LBR software filter, it appears to only check the
> target privilege level and is missing the from_plm privilege validation:
>
> arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c:amd_pmu_lbr_filter() {
>     ...
>     /* If type does not correspond, then discard */
>     if (type == X86_BR_NONE || (br_sel & type) != type) {
>         cpuc->lbr_entries[i].from = 0;  /* mark invalid */
>     ...
> }
>
> Similarly, the AMD BRS filter explicitly only validates the to address
> and ignores the from address:
>
> arch/x86/events/amd/brs.c:amd_brs_match_plm() {
>     ...
>     if (!(type & plm_k) && kernel_ip(to))
>         return 0;
>
>     if (!(type & plm_u) && !kernel_ip(to))
>         return 0;
>
>     return 1;
> }
>
> Could kernel addresses from kernel-to-user branches leak into user-space
> LBR stacks on AMD systems through these paths, bypassing KASLR in the
> same way?

Yes, this is a known issue and AMD guys would post the fixing patches
separately. Thanks.


>

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-09  9:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-09  5:02 [Patch v2 0/9] perf/x86: Miscellaneous PMU bug fixes Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 1/9] perf/x86/intel: Remove anythread_deprecated bit from perf_capabilities Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 2/9] perf/x86: Introduce is_x86_pmu() helper Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 3/9] perf/x86: Update cap_user_rdpmc base on rdpmc user disable state Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 4/9] perf/x86/intel: Fallback to sw branch type decoding if no hw decoding Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:24   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-09 10:04     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 5/9] perf/x86/intel: Drop LBR entries whose privilege level mismatches br_sel Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:21   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-09  9:40     ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 6/9] perf/x86/intel: Validate return value of intel_pmu_init_hybrid() Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:25   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-09  9:44     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 7/9] perf/x86/intel: Drop fixed-counter PEBS constraints for baseline PEBS Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 8/9] perf/core: Fix kernel register info leak via hardware skid Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:02 ` [Patch v2 9/9] perf/core: Check kernel access when kernel callchains are requested Dapeng Mi
2026-06-09  5:24   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-09  9:49     ` Mi, Dapeng

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=2fc34158-debd-467c-b8fe-b9c04df2a19e@linux.intel.com \
    --to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.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