[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1558984077-7773-2-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 12:07:56 -0700
From: kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
To: mingo@...nel.org, acme@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
vincent.weaver@...ne.edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
jolsa@...hat.com, eranian@...gle.com,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2 2/3] perf/x86/regs: Check reserved bits
From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
The perf fuzzer triggers a warning which map to:
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(idx >= ARRAY_SIZE(pt_regs_offset)))
return 0;
The bits between XMM registers and generic registers are reserved.
But perf_reg_validate() doesn't check these bits.
Add PERF_REG_X86_RESERVED for reserved bits on X86.
Check the reserved bits in perf_reg_validate().
Fixes: 878068ea270e ("perf/x86: Support outputting XMM registers")
Reported-by: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
---
Changes since V1:
- Rename REG_RESERVED to PERF_REG_X86_RESERVED
arch/x86/kernel/perf_regs.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/perf_regs.c
index 07c30ee..bb7e113 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/perf_regs.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/perf_regs.c
@@ -74,6 +74,9 @@ u64 perf_reg_value(struct pt_regs *regs, int idx)
return regs_get_register(regs, pt_regs_offset[idx]);
}
+#define PERF_REG_X86_RESERVED (((1ULL << PERF_REG_X86_XMM0) - 1) & \
+ ~((1ULL << PERF_REG_X86_MAX) - 1))
+
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
#define REG_NOSUPPORT ((1ULL << PERF_REG_X86_R8) | \
(1ULL << PERF_REG_X86_R9) | \
@@ -86,7 +89,7 @@ u64 perf_reg_value(struct pt_regs *regs, int idx)
int perf_reg_validate(u64 mask)
{
- if (!mask || (mask & REG_NOSUPPORT))
+ if (!mask || (mask & (REG_NOSUPPORT | PERF_REG_X86_RESERVED)))
return -EINVAL;
return 0;
@@ -112,7 +115,7 @@ void perf_get_regs_user(struct perf_regs *regs_user,
int perf_reg_validate(u64 mask)
{
- if (!mask || (mask & REG_NOSUPPORT))
+ if (!mask || (mask & (REG_NOSUPPORT | PERF_REG_X86_RESERVED)))
return -EINVAL;
return 0;
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists