linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: Pass external callchain entry to get_perf

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAADnVQLoF49pu8CT81FV1ddvysQzvYT4UO1P21fVxnafnO5vrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 08:02:06 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@...ux.dev>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, 
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, 
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard <eddyz87@...il.com>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, 
	KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, 
	"linux-perf-use." <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: Pass external callchain entry to get_perf_callchain

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 5:14 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 06:01:28PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
> > As Alexei noted, get_perf_callchain() return values may be reused
> > if a task is preempted after the BPF program enters migrate disable
> > mode. Drawing on the per-cpu design of bpf_perf_callchain_entries,
> > stack-allocated memory of bpf_perf_callchain_entry is used here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@...ux.dev>
> > ---
> >  kernel/bpf/stackmap.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> > index 94e46b7f340..acd72c021c0 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> > @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ struct bpf_stack_map {
> >       struct stack_map_bucket *buckets[] __counted_by(n_buckets);
> >  };
> >
> > +struct bpf_perf_callchain_entry {
> > +     u64 nr;
> > +     u64 ip[PERF_MAX_STACK_DEPTH];
> > +};
> > +
> >  static inline bool stack_map_use_build_id(struct bpf_map *map)
> >  {
> >       return (map->map_flags & BPF_F_STACK_BUILD_ID);
> > @@ -305,6 +310,7 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_get_stackid, struct pt_regs *, regs, struct bpf_map *, map,
> >       bool user = flags & BPF_F_USER_STACK;
> >       struct perf_callchain_entry *trace;
> >       bool kernel = !user;
> > +     struct bpf_perf_callchain_entry entry = { 0 };
>
> so IIUC having entries on stack we do not need to do preempt_disable
> you had in the previous version, right?
>
> I saw Andrii's justification to have this on the stack, I think it's
> fine, but does it have to be initialized? it seems that only used
> entries are copied to map

No. We're not adding 1k stack consumption.

pw-bot: cr