linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/amd: check event before enable to avoid GPF

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

Message-ID: <0494aedf-9759-4427-a7f3-39a91bd5771d@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 16:26:43 -0400
From: George Kennedy <george.kennedy@...cle.com>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
Cc: harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
        irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/amd: check event before enable to avoid GPF

Hi Ravi,

On 5/30/2024 2:30 PM, George Kennedy wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
> On 5/29/2024 11:37 PM, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>> Hi George,
>>
>>> Events can be deleted and the entry can be NULL.
>> Can you please also explain "how".
> It looks like x86_pmu_stop() is clearing the bit in active_mask and 
> setting the events entry to NULL (and doing it in the correct order) 
> for the same events index that amd_pmu_enable_all() is trying to enable.
>>
>>> Check event for NULL in amd_pmu_enable_all() before enable to avoid 
>>> a GPF.
>>> This appears to be an AMD only issue.
>>>
>>> Syzkaller reported a GPF in amd_pmu_enable_all.
>> Can you please provide a bug report link? Also, any reproducer?
> The Syzkaller reproducer can be found in this link:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CAMt6jhyec7-TSFpr3F+_ikjpu39WV3jnCBBGwpzpBrPx55w20g@mail.gmail.com/T/#u 
>
>>
>>> @@ -760,7 +760,8 @@ static void amd_pmu_enable_all(int added)
>>>           if (!test_bit(idx, cpuc->active_mask))
>>>               continue;
>>>   -        amd_pmu_enable_event(cpuc->events[idx]);
>>> +        if (cpuc->events[idx])
>>> +            amd_pmu_enable_event(cpuc->events[idx]);
>> What if cpuc->events[idx] becomes NULL after if (cpuc->events[idx]) but
>> before amd_pmu_enable_event(cpuc->events[idx])?
> Good question, but the crash has not reproduced with the proposed fix 
> in hours of testing. It usually reproduces within minutes without the 
> fix.

Also, a similar fix is done in __intel_pmu_enable_all() in 
arch/x86/events/intel/core.c except that a WARN_ON_ONCE is done as well.
See: 
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc1/source/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c#L2256

>
> Thank you,
> George
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ravi
>