From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: 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>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>,
Ananth Narayan <ananth.narayan@amd.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>,
Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>,
Falcon Thomas <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v5 02/18] perf/x86/intel: Validate LBR XSAVE state before updating LBR stack
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 18:09:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <efb39a39-5302-49ee-b7d3-a9ef574ab7d9@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029094044.GJ1779021@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 10/29/2026 5:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 12:38:58PM +0800, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>> intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave() doesn't check if the LBR data is present
>> in the xsave area. If LBR data is in the INIT state, the LBR data may not
>> be really written into the xsave area.
>>
>> Add an explicit LBR XSAVE state presence check before updating the cached
>> LBR stack. Also clear the cached LBR stack when intel_pmu_lbr_reset() is
>> called, in addition to resetting the hardware LBR register file, to prevent
>> stale LBR data from being reused after a context switch or similar
>> transition.
>>
>> Fixes: c085fb877467 ("perf/x86/intel/lbr: Support XSAVES for arch LBR read")
>> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c | 10 +++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> index 0b446d8912e4..a2e4ba7e1a4f 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
>> @@ -193,6 +193,8 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_reset(void)
>> {
>> struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>>
>> + cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;
>> +
>> if (!x86_pmu.lbr_nr)
>> return;
>>
> This also clears the stack if there is no LBR; was that on purpose? The
> Changelog is silent on this point.
Yes, it's on purpose. The intent is to clear the cached software LBR stack
as well when resetting the hardware LBR stack. This is to avoid leak the
LBR stack information in some unexpected cases. In theory, it can be placed
after the !x86_pmu.lbr_nr, I hope the software LBR stack can always be
cleared regardless of there is LBR user or not.
My fault, I missed to describe this change in the change log. I would add
it in next version.
Thanks.
>
>> @@ -1010,9 +1012,15 @@ static void intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>> intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, NULL);
>> return;
>> }
>> + xsave->header.xfeatures = 0;
>> xsaves(&xsave->xsave, XFEATURE_MASK_LBR);
>>
>> - intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, xsave->lbr.entries);
>> + if (xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_LBR) {
>> + intel_pmu_store_lbr(cpuc, xsave->lbr.entries);
>> + } else {
>> + /* Clear the LBR stack to avoid leaking stale entries. */
>> + cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> void intel_pmu_lbr_read(void)
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-29 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 4:38 [Patch v5 00/18] perf/x86: Fix multiple LBR sampling issues Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 01/18] perf/x86: Disable LBR if x86_pmu.lbr_nr exceeds MAX_LBR_ENTRIES Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 9:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 9:56 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-10-29 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 02/18] perf/x86/intel: Validate LBR XSAVE state before updating LBR stack Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 9:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 10:09 ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-10-29 4:38 ` [Patch v5 03/18] perf/x86/amd/lbr: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 04/18] perf/x86/intel/lbr: " Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 05/18] perf/x86: Add lbr_enabled to track LBR state Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 06/18] perf/x86/amd: Avoid re-enabling PMU and LBR for BPF when disabled Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 07/18] perf/x86/intel: Add helper to enable PMU without LBR Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 08/18] perf/x86/intel: Avoid re-enabling PMU and LBR for BPF when disabled Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 09/18] perf/x86/intel: Keep LBR frozen throughout PMI handling Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 10/18] perf/x86/intel: Allow LBR read helpers to operate on explicit stacks Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 11/18] perf/x86/intel: Use a dedicated LBR stack for BPF snapshotting Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 12/18] perf/x86/intel: Always snapshot live hardware LBR state for BPF Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 13/18] perf/x86/intel: Refresh LBR stack for non-PEBS LBR events if needed Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 14/18] perf/x86/intel: Account arch-PEBS in lbr_pebs_users Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 15/18] perf/x86/intel: Clear raw LBR counters in the LBR stack Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 16/18] perf/x86/intel: Refill LBR stack for LBR counter events in PMI handler Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 17/18] perf/x86/intel: Pass LBR stack size into store_lbr() Dapeng Mi
2026-10-29 4:39 ` [Patch v5 18/18] perf/core: Don't overwrite shared LBR stack depth Dapeng Mi
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=efb39a39-5302-49ee-b7d3-a9ef574ab7d9@linux.intel.com \
--to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ananth.narayan@amd.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@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 \
--cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
--cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
--cc=zide.chen@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®