From: Alexander Antonov <alexander.antonov@linux.intel.com>
To: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kyle.meyer@hpe.com, alexey.v.bayduraev@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix NULL pointer dereference issue in upi_fill_topology()
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 16:11:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0a2beede-bbbf-4f80-8f9d-7c92737e983d@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7caf86b8-f050-4d0f-8aba-e2d725a0ab64@linux.intel.com>
On 11/20/2023 10:21 PM, Liang, Kan wrote:
>
> On 2023-11-20 2:49 p.m., Alexander Antonov wrote:
>> On 11/15/2023 8:00 PM, Liang, Kan wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-15 10:13 a.m., alexander.antonov@linux.intel.com wrote:
>>>> From: Alexander Antonov <alexander.antonov@linux.intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> The NULL dereference happens inside upi_fill_topology() procedure in
>>>> case of disabling one of the sockets on the system.
>>>>
>>>> For example, if you disable the 2nd socket on a 4-socket system then
>>>> uncore_max_dies() returns 3 and inside pmu_alloc_topology() memory will
>>>> be allocated only for 3 sockets and stored in type->topology.
>>>> In discover_upi_topology() memory is accessed by socket id from
>>>> CPUNODEID
>>>> registers which contain physical ids (from 0 to 3) and on the line:
>>>>
>>>> upi = &type->topology[nid][idx];
>>>>
>>>> out-of-bound access will happen and the 'upi' pointer will be passed to
>>>> upi_fill_topology() where it will be dereferenced.
>>>>
>>>> To avoid this issue update the code to convert physical socket id to
>>>> logical socket id in discover_upi_topology() before accessing memory.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: f680b6e6062e ("perf/x86/intel/uncore: Enable UPI topology
>>>> discovery for Icelake Server")
>>>> Reported-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle.meyer@hpe.com>
>>>> Tested-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle.meyer@hpe.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Antonov <alexander.antonov@linux.intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c | 10 ++++++++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
>>>> b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
>>>> index 8250f0f59c2b..49bc27ab26ad 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
>>>> @@ -5596,7 +5596,7 @@ static int discover_upi_topology(struct
>>>> intel_uncore_type *type, int ubox_did, i
>>>> struct pci_dev *ubox = NULL;
>>>> struct pci_dev *dev = NULL;
>>>> u32 nid, gid;
>>>> - int i, idx, ret = -EPERM;
>>>> + int i, idx, lgc_pkg, ret = -EPERM;
>>>> struct intel_uncore_topology *upi;
>>>> unsigned int devfn;
>>>> @@ -5614,8 +5614,13 @@ static int discover_upi_topology(struct
>>>> intel_uncore_type *type, int ubox_did, i
>>>> for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
>>>> if (nid != GIDNIDMAP(gid, i))
>>>> continue;
>>>> + lgc_pkg = topology_phys_to_logical_pkg(i);
>>>> + if (lgc_pkg < 0) {
>>>> + ret = -EPERM;
>>>> + goto err;
>>>> + }
>>> In the snbep_pci2phy_map_init(), there are similar codes to find the
>>> logical die id. Can we factor a common function for both of them?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kan
>> Hi Kan,
>>
>> Thank you for your comment.
>> Yes, I think we can factor out the common loop where GIDNIDMAP is being
>> checked.
>> But inside snbep_pci2phy_map_init() we have a bit different procedure which
>> also does the following:
>>
>> if (topology_max_die_per_package() > 1)
>> die_id = i;
>>
>> I think that having this code, at least, in our case could bring us to the
>> same issue which we are trying to fix. But of course we could
>> parametrize this checking.
> The topology_max_die_per_package() > 1 means there are more that 1 die
> in a socket. AFAIK, it only happens on the Cascade Lake AP.
>
> Did you observe it in the ICX?
>
> Thanks,
> Kan
No, I didn't observe it on ICX. Seems for now we have it only on CLX-AP
Thanks,
Alexander
>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexander
>>>> for (idx = 0; idx < type->num_boxes; idx++) {
>>>> - upi = &type->topology[nid][idx];
>>>> + upi = &type->topology[lgc_pkg][idx];
>>>> devfn = PCI_DEVFN(dev_link0 + idx,
>>>> ICX_UPI_REGS_ADDR_FUNCTION);
>>>> dev =
>>>> pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pci_domain_nr(ubox->bus),
>>>> ubox->bus->number,
>>>> @@ -5626,6 +5631,7 @@ static int discover_upi_topology(struct
>>>> intel_uncore_type *type, int ubox_did, i
>>>> goto err;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> + break;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> err:
>>>>
>>>> base-commit: 9bacdd8996c77c42ca004440be610692275ff9d0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-21 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-15 15:13 [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix NULL pointer dereference issue in upi_fill_topology() alexander.antonov
2023-11-15 19:00 ` Liang, Kan
2023-11-20 19:49 ` Alexander Antonov
2023-11-20 21:21 ` Liang, Kan
2023-11-21 15:11 ` Alexander Antonov [this message]
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=0a2beede-bbbf-4f80-8f9d-7c92737e983d@linux.intel.com \
--to=alexander.antonov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexey.v.bayduraev@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kyle.meyer@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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