perf/x86/intel: Init early callchain for bts event
Subsystems (2)
Jiri Olsa
reviewerPATCH 1/1 perf/x86/intel: Init early callchain for bts event
Vince reported crash in bts flush code when touching the callchain data, which was supposed to be initialized as an 'early' callchain data.
BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000000 ... Call Trace: <IRQ> intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer+0x151/0x220 ? intel_get_event_constraints+0x219/0x360 ? perf_assign_events+0xe2/0x2a0 ? select_idle_sibling+0x22/0x3a0 ? __update_load_avg_se+0x1ec/0x270 ? enqueue_task_fair+0x377/0xdd0 ? cpumask_next_and+0x19/0x20 ? load_balance+0x134/0x950 ? check_preempt_curr+0x7a/0x90 ? ttwu_do_wakeup+0x19/0x140 x86_pmu_stop+0x3b/0x90 x86_pmu_del+0x57/0x160 event_sched_out.isra.106+0x81/0x170 group_sched_out.part.108+0x51/0xc0 __perf_event_disable+0x7f/0x160 event_function+0x8c/0xd0 remote_function+0x3c/0x50 flush_smp_call_function_queue+0x35/0xe0 smp_call_function_single_interrupt+0x3a/0xd0 call_function_single_interrupt+0xf/0x20 </IRQ>
It was triggered by fuzzer by can be easilt reproduced by:
# perf record -e cpu/branch-instructions/p -g -c 1
The problem is that bts drain code does not initialize sample's early callchain data and calls perf_prepare_sample with NULL sample->callchain, even if it's expected to exist via __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY sample type bit.
The fix initializes the callchain data for this case with empty callchain, because bts does not report callchains.
--- arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c +5 -0
@@ -577,6 +577,8 @@ void intel_pmu_disable_bts(void)update_debugctlmsr (debugctlmsr); } +static struct perf_callchain_entry __empty_callchain = { .nr =0 , }; +int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer (void ) {struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc =this_cpu_ptr (&cpu_hw_events);
@@ -612,6 +614,9 @@ int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer(void)perf_sample_data_init (&data,0 , event->hw.last_period); +if (event->attr.sample_type & __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY) + data.callchain = &__empty_callchain; +/* * BTS leaks kernel addresses in branches across the cpl boundary, * such as traps or system calls, so unless the user is asking for
Signature · 1 line
2.17.2
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerQuoted 7 lines · Jiri Olsa
Vince reported crash in bts flush code when touching the callchain data, which was supposed to be initialized as an 'early' callchain data.
BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000000 ...
Quoted 7 lines
It was triggered by fuzzer by can be easilt reproduced by:
# perf record -e cpu/branch-instructions/p -g -c 1The problem is that bts drain code does not initialize sample's early callchain data and calls
perf_prepare_samplewith NULLsample->callchain, even if it's expected to exist via__PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLYsample type bit.
Not sure that is the actual problem, nor that this:
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer(void) · line 622
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c +3
-0@@ -612,6 +614,9 @@ int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer(void)perf_sample_data_init (&data,0 , event->hw.last_period); +if (event->attr.sample_type & __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY) + data.callchain = &__empty_callchain; +/* * BTS leaks kernel addresses in branches across the cpl boundary, * such as traps or system calls, so unless the user is asking for
is the right fix.
If you look at commit:
6cbc304f2f36 ("perf/x86/intel: Fix unwind errors from PEBS entries (mk-II)")
Then the right fix would be to do perf_callchain() from the BTS drain code -- if '/p'.
Because prior to that commit, we would do a perf_callchain() in intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer()'s call to perf_prepare_sample(), which would do an actual stack unwind for a branch entry.
With your patch, we get an empty stack for every entry.
Which is a change in behaviour...
Now arguably, this is really stupid behaviour. Who in his right mind wants callchain output on BTS entries. And even if they do, BTS + precise_ip is nonsensical.
So in my mind disallowing precise_ip on BTS would be the simplest fix.
Hmm?
Quoted 4 lines
So in my mind disallowing
precise_ipon BTS would be the simplest fix.Hmm?
Both seem reasonable to me.
-Andi
Quoted 38 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 7 lines · Jiri Olsa
Vince reported crash in bts flush code when touching the callchain data, which was supposed to be initialized as an 'early' callchain data.
BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000000 ...Quoted 7 lines
It was triggered by fuzzer by can be easilt reproduced by:
# perf record -e cpu/branch-instructions/p -g -c 1The problem is that bts drain code does not initialize sample's early callchain data and calls
perf_prepare_samplewith NULLsample->callchain, even if it's expected to exist via__PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLYsample type bit.Not sure that is the actual problem, nor that this:
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer(void) · line 622
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c +3
-0@@ -612,6 +614,9 @@ int intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer(void)perf_sample_data_init (&data,0 , event->hw.last_period); +if (event->attr.sample_type & __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY) + data.callchain = &__empty_callchain; +/* * BTS leaks kernel addresses in branches across the cpl boundary, * such as traps or system calls, so unless the user is asking for is the right fix.
If you look at commit:
6cbc304f2f36("perf/x86/intel: Fix unwind errors from PEBS entries (mk-II)")Then the right fix would be to do
perf_callchain()from the BTS drain code -- if '/p'.
Quoted 7 lines
Because prior to that commit, we would do a
perf_callchain()in intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer()'s call toperf_prepare_sample(), which would do an actual stack unwind for a branch entry.With your patch, we get an empty stack for every entry.
Which is a change in behaviour...
I thought there's no callchain anyway, because we use zero-ed regs
Quoted 8 lines
Now arguably, this is really stupid behaviour. Who in his right mind wants callchain output on BTS entries. And even if they do, BTS +
precise_ipis nonsensical.So in my mind disallowing
precise_ipon BTS would be the simplest fix.Hmm?
sounds ok, will post it
thanks,
jirka