linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/5] x86, perf: Fix LBR call stack save/restore

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1445366797-30894-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:46:33 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	peterz@...radead.org
Cc:	acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] x86, perf: Fix LBR call stack save/restore

From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>

This fixes a bug added with the earlier 90405aa02. The bug
could lead to lost LBR call stacks. When restoring the LBR
state we need to use the TOS of the previous context, not
the current context. To do that we need to save/restore the tos.

Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 4.2+
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h           | 1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c | 4 +++-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
index d871c94..1b47164 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
@@ -631,6 +631,7 @@ struct x86_perf_task_context {
 	u64 lbr_from[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
 	u64 lbr_to[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
 	u64 lbr_info[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
+	int tos;
 	int lbr_callstack_users;
 	int lbr_stack_state;
 };
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
index ad0b8b0..0e4ea00 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
@@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_restore(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
 	}
 
 	mask = x86_pmu.lbr_nr - 1;
-	tos = intel_pmu_lbr_tos();
+	tos = task_ctx->tos;
 	for (i = 0; i < tos; i++) {
 		lbr_idx = (tos - i) & mask;
 		wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_from + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_from[i]);
@@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_restore(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
 		if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO)
 			wrmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_info[i]);
 	}
+	wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_tos, tos);
 	task_ctx->lbr_stack_state = LBR_NONE;
 }
 
@@ -270,6 +271,7 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_save(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
 		if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO)
 			rdmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_info[i]);
 	}
+	task_ctx->tos = tos;
 	task_ctx->lbr_stack_state = LBR_VALID;
 }
 
-- 
2.4.3

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/