From: "Belgaumkar, Vinay" <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
To: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
"Alexander Shishkin" <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Eranian Stephane <eranian@google.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf: Add checks to prevent null ptr access
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:48:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1d6c8cd5-76e9-421c-9e36-3de7c2816d27@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2b62bcb-b5a1-48e9-93c8-644ab3ac4439@linux.intel.com>
On 9/15/2026 6:40 PM, Mi, Dapeng wrote:
> On 9/5/2026 2:16 AM, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>> Sashiko recommended some additional checks to prevent null pointer
>> access. Check for revoked states inside perf_event_read_local(), as
>> the pmu event may have already been freed at this point. Add a null
> Could you please show where perf_event_read_local() could be called after
> the event is revoked?
perf_event_read_local() is only available to be called in the kernel
context. So, BPF helpers can call it. This was the scenario outlined by
Sashiko:
If CPU A calls perf_event_read_local(), disables interrupts, and locklessly
checks event->state, it can pass if the event state is
PERF_EVENT_STATE_INACTIVE.
Concurrently, if CPU B calls perf_pmu_unregister() which leads to
__pmu_detach_event(), it will not send an IPI to synchronize with CPU A
since the event is inactive. CPU B then sets event->state to
PERF_EVENT_STATE_REVOKED and clears event->pmu to NULL.
When CPU A continues and calls __perf_event_read_cpu(event, event->cpu),
if the event has PERF_EV_CAP_READ_SCOPE, it will dereference
event->pmu->scope, which was just set to NULL by CPU B, causing a panic.
So, I think the scenario is- we have a regular perf session ongoing and
a parallel session (through BPF) that tries to access the same counter.
>
> BTW, the prefix should be "perf/core:" instead of "perf:" by following
> current naming convention.
Sure.
Thanks,
Vinay.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>> check inside __perf_event_read_cpu() as well before accessing the pmu
>> ptr.
>>
>> Cc: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/events/core.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index 7777e82aad5e..059f82f0cadd 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -4788,14 +4788,19 @@ static inline const struct cpumask *perf_scope_cpu_topology_cpumask(unsigned int
>>
>> static int __perf_event_read_cpu(struct perf_event *event, int event_cpu)
>> {
>> + struct pmu *pmu = READ_ONCE(event->pmu);
>> int local_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>> u16 local_pkg, event_pkg;
>>
>> if ((unsigned)event_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids)
>> return event_cpu;
>>
>> + if (!pmu)
>> + return -ENODEV;
>> +
>> if (event->group_caps & PERF_EV_CAP_READ_SCOPE) {
>> - const struct cpumask *cpumask = perf_scope_cpu_topology_cpumask(event->pmu->scope, event_cpu);
>> + const struct cpumask *cpumask = perf_scope_cpu_topology_cpumask(pmu->scope,
>> + event_cpu);
>>
>> if (cpumask && cpumask_test_cpu(local_cpu, cpumask))
>> return local_cpu;
>> @@ -4917,6 +4922,11 @@ int perf_event_read_local(struct perf_event *event, u64 *value,
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> + if (READ_ONCE(event->state) <= PERF_EVENT_STATE_REVOKED) {
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
>> /*
>> * Get the event CPU numbers, and adjust them to local if the event is
>> * a per-package event that can be read locally
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-16 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-04 18:16 [PATCH 1/2] perf: Fix null pointer access in is_include_guest_event() Vinay Belgaumkar
2026-09-04 18:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf: Add checks to prevent null ptr access Vinay Belgaumkar
2026-09-16 1:40 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-16 21:48 ` Belgaumkar, Vinay [this message]
2026-09-07 6:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf: Fix null pointer access in is_include_guest_event() 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=1d6c8cd5-76e9-421c-9e36-3de7c2816d27@intel.com \
--to=vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®