Linux s390 Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Thomas Richter" <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ping2 linux-next] perf test: probe_vfs_getname add do_getname() probing fallback
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 10:12:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911101221.A4BE01F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260911100455.2131629-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The fallback probe for `do_getname` incorrectly uses `result->iname:string` instead of `result->name:string`, leading to string truncation or out-of-bounds reads for long filenames.
- [Medium] The new `do_getname` probe logic omits the fallback to reading the user-space pointer (`filename:ustring`) if the `result` struct is optimized out by the compiler, reducing test robustness.
--

commit ad303146f8b0a504f7736915a5ea288cabae2ca8
Author: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>

perf test: probe_vfs_getname add do_getname() probing fallback

This commit extends the vfs_getname perf test to fall back to probing
do_getname() if getname_flags() cannot be probed. This accounts for
recent kernel changes that altered the getname_flags() implementation.

> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/lib/probe_vfs_getname.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/lib/probe_vfs_getname.sh
> index 88cd0e26d5f67..9156a79212b9e 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/lib/probe_vfs_getname.sh
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/lib/probe_vfs_getname.sh

[ ... ]

> @@ -28,12 +30,24 @@ add_probe_vfs_getname() {
>  			line=$(perf probe -L getname_flags 2>&1 | grep -E "$result_aname_re" | sed -r "s/$result_aname_re/\1/")
>  		fi
>  
> +		if [ -z "$line" ] ; then
> +			do_getname=1
> +			result_iname_re="[[:space:]]+([[:digit:]]+)[[:space:]]+initname\(result\);"
> +			line=$(perf probe -L do_getname 2>&1 | grep -E "$result_iname_re" | sed -r "s/$result_iname_re/\1/")
> +		fi
> +
>  		if [ -z "$line" ] ; then
>  			echo "Could not find probeable line"
>  			return 2
>  		fi
>  
> -		perf probe -q       "vfs_getname=getname_flags:${line} pathname=result->name:string" || \
> +		if [ "$do_getname" -eq 1 ]
> +		then
> +			param="vfs_getname=do_getname:${line} pathname=result->iname:string"

[Severity: Medium]
Will tracing result->iname as a string cause out-of-bounds reads or
truncated output for long filenames?

Looking at getname_long() in fs/namei.c, when a filename >=
EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX is processed, a separate buffer is allocated for
name->name:

	memcpy(p, &name->iname, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX);
	len = strncpy_from_user(p + EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX,
				filename + EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX,
				PATH_MAX - EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX);
	if (unlikely(len < 0))
		return len;
	if (unlikely(len == PATH_MAX - EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX))
		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
	name->name = no_free_ptr(p);

This leaves name->iname completely filled without a null terminator. Should
this probe use pathname=result->name:string instead to safely handle both
short and long filenames?

> +			perf probe -q "$param" || perf probe $add_probe_verbose "$param" || return 1

[Severity: Medium]
Does this fallback logic miss the user-space pointer retry?

The original code for getname_flags falls back to tracing the user-space
pointer (filename:ustring) if probing the result struct fails (which can
happen if the compiler optimizes the struct out).

In this new do_getname block, if the first probe fails, it retries the
exact same parameter with $add_probe_verbose rather than falling back to
pathname=filename:ustring. Can this cause spurious test failures on
environments where debug info for the result pointer is optimized out?

> +			return 0
> +		fi
> +		perf probe -q "vfs_getname=getname_flags:${line} pathname=result->name:string" || \
>  		perf probe $add_probe_verbose "vfs_getname=getname_flags:${line} pathname=filename:ustring" || return 1
>  	fi
>  }

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260911100455.2131629-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11 10:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-11 10:04 [PATCH ping2 linux-next] perf test: probe_vfs_getname add do_getname() probing fallback Thomas Richter
2026-09-11 10:12 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-05-19 11:06 Thomas Richter

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=20260911101221.A4BE01F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=tmricht@linux.ibm.com \
    /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