From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (dggsgout12.his.huawei.com [45.249.212.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D98F37F30B for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 01:41:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789090889; cv=none; b=eJrg3HwKb3aImhg+YNI5K/GE8PDAAsRa6MnBZko0009zyVZVHybnesg/Nma5fKN0MsEPYkFDOjTaDphBZp3lEG6QKAtkhdIRoemPJ942OLgaEx2j/cbHGQrXyefk7RU+m0gBcWmJXSgSWSXlwNTK5NwG7DmLcY+RcY/aCX4LdNA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789090889; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3J/d6P85kTIhEeifbnE/N524lRDfjIyBwMPaPH08xA4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=i0iIc1u7gWeLMZHFv8QjumhszsAb2Egt2HWu9GQx9Z2cVENndEtQxLXBwD1Ai6kALLTSCSdLI492chzeTJlOaXXCEvpFCTqtS4upS3Qgb/tqT7EcdS0V65FuNEaCOZE5k3fpg9I9ZHqxR7dU64K2/ftAFssJv7v8zhGkWec9hLY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.177]) by dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4hgy1k0j5XzKHMN5 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:41:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [10.116.40.128]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E844058D for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:41:19 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.110.36] (unknown [10.67.110.36]) by APP4 (Coremail) with UTF8SMTPA id gCh0CgDXOpg+XKNqxK8jBg--.35142S2; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:41:19 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: <42b259e3-7e58-4164-bd2d-83bf7e9699dd@huaweicloud.com> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 09:41:18 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 21/26] perf annotate-arm64: Support stack variable tracking To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org References: <20260908133633.666091F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Tengda Wu In-Reply-To: <20260908133633.666091F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CM-TRANSID:gCh0CgDXOpg+XKNqxK8jBg--.35142S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxurykZF1UCrykWF4UJw15CFg_yoW5Xr48pr srGay3GF4rGr4rtws3XrW8Xr9Ygwn7GF4Y9wn8JF1Fyr1S9FnakFZxtFy3Kay7Xr93uw40 vw1q9rnrXws7ZaDanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUgmb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I20VC2zVCF04k2 6cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rwA2F7IY1VAKz4 vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_JFI_Gr1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvEc7Cj xVAFwI0_Gr0_Cr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv67AKxVW8Jr0_Cr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x 0267AKxVWxJr0_GcWle2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqx4xG64xvF2IEw4CE5I8C rVC2j2WlYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4 IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvEwIxGrwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkE bVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67 AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI 42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6r1j6r1xMI IF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_GrUvcSsGvfC2 KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU1CPfJUUUUU== X-CM-SenderInfo: pzxwv0hjgdqx5xdzvxpfor3voofrz/ On 2026/9/8 21:36, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote: > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: > - [Medium] Invalid register comparison causes unparsed operands to be falsely treated as stack variables. > -- > > commit 7ef0e34126bb69c05756eba7378c5775c6ea2fd3 > Author: Tengda Wu > > perf annotate-arm64: Support stack variable tracking > > This commit extends update_insn_state_arm64 to track data types stored on the > stack. It handles stack loads and stores, introducing > propagate_store_reg_state to follow data types between registers and memory. > >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate-arch/annotate-arm64.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate-arch/annotate-arm64.c >> index 9d43e2c2041cd..d520975c59363 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate-arch/annotate-arm64.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate-arch/annotate-arm64.c >> @@ -542,12 +544,57 @@ static int propagate_load_reg_state(struct type_state *state, > > [ ... ] > >> + if (dloc->fb_cfa) { >> + u64 ip = dloc->ms->sym->start + dl->al.offset; >> + u64 pc = map__rip_2objdump(dloc->ms->map, ip); >> + >> + if (die_get_cfa(dloc->di->dbg, pc, &fbreg, &fboff) < 0) >> + fbreg = -1; >> + } >> + >> retry: >> if (arch_get_reg_offset(dloc->arch, src, sreg, state, false, ®_offset)) >> return -1; >> >> reg_offset += mem_offset; >> >> + /* Check stack variables with offset */ >> + if (sreg == fbreg || sreg == state->stack_reg) { > > [Severity: Medium] > When an unparsed or unsupported base register leaves sreg as -1, and fbreg is > also -1, does this condition evaluate to true? Could this cause unparsed > source operands to be incorrectly treated as stack loads? > Agreed. > [ ... ] > >> +static void propagate_store_reg_state(struct type_state *state, >> + struct data_loc_info *dloc, >> + struct disasm_line *dl, int sreg, >> + struct annotated_op_loc *dst, >> + int mem_offset) >> +{ > > [ ... ] > >> + if (dloc->fb_cfa) { >> + u64 ip = dloc->ms->sym->start + dl->al.offset; >> + u64 pc = map__rip_2objdump(dloc->ms->map, ip); >> + >> + if (die_get_cfa(dloc->di->dbg, pc, &fbreg, &fboff) < 0) >> + fbreg = -1; >> + } >> + >> + /* Check stack variables with offset */ >> + if (dreg == fbreg || dreg == state->stack_reg) { > > [Severity: Medium] > Similarly to the load case, if the base register extraction leaves dreg as -1 > and fbreg is also -1, does this check evaluate to true? Will this erroneously > treat unparsed target operands as stack stores, potentially corrupting the > stack type state tracking? > Agreed. It would be best to add a guard for when dreg is not -1. Tengda