linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: fix segfault in `lock contention -b`

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <aWUeOQbFOZ2CVBG2@tycho.pizza>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:15:53 -0700
From: Tycho Andersen <tycho@...nel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
	Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@...gle.com>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: fix segfault in `lock contention -b`

On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 04:49:01PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 09:44:17AM -0700, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > From: "Tycho Andersen (AMD)" <tycho@...nel.org>
> > 
> > When run on a kernel without BTF info, I get:
> > 
> >     libbpf: kernel BTF is missing at '/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux', was CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF enabled?
> >     libbpf: failed to find valid kernel BTF
> > 
> >     Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> >     0x00005555556915b7 in btf.type_cnt ()
> >     (gdb) bt
> >     #0  0x00005555556915b7 in btf.type_cnt ()
> >     #1  0x0000555555691fbc in btf_find_by_name_kind ()
> >     #2  0x00005555556920d0 in btf.find_by_name_kind ()
> >     #3  0x00005555558a1b7c in init_numa_data (con=0x7fffffffd0a0) at util/bpf_lock_contention.c:125
> >     #4  0x00005555558a264b in lock_contention_prepare (con=0x7fffffffd0a0) at util/bpf_lock_contention.c:313
> >     #5  0x0000555555620702 in __cmd_contention (argc=0, argv=0x7fffffffea10) at builtin-lock.c:2084
> >     #6  0x0000555555622c8d in cmd_lock (argc=0, argv=0x7fffffffea10) at builtin-lock.c:2755
> >     #7  0x0000555555651451 in run_builtin (p=0x555556104f00 <commands+576>, argc=3, argv=0x7fffffffea10)
> >         at perf.c:349
> >     #8  0x00005555556516ed in handle_internal_command (argc=3, argv=0x7fffffffea10) at perf.c:401
> >     #9  0x000055555565184e in run_argv (argcp=0x7fffffffe7fc, argv=0x7fffffffe7f0) at perf.c:445
> >     #10 0x0000555555651b9f in main (argc=3, argv=0x7fffffffea10) at perf.c:553
> > 
> > If we really are running -b without BTF info, the error is fatal, so let's
> > propagate it and exit accordingly.
> 
> Thanks for the patch.
> 
> I'm curious how the kernel will react if we want to load the BPF.
> Probably the verifier will reject as it calls some helpers like
> bpf_get_current_task_btf().
> 
> I think it used to work without BTF - the callstack (default) and task
> output mode won't need it.  It'd be nice if we could run it when the
> kernel doesn't have BTF.  But maybe it's out of scope of this patch.
> 
> That said, can you add a NULL check in the init_numa_data() instead
> and see how far it can go?

Looks like not much further, it fails in lock_contention_bpf__load():

./perf lock contention -b
libbpf: kernel BTF is missing at '/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux', was CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF enabled?
libbpf: failed to find valid kernel BTF
libbpf: kernel BTF is missing at '/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux', was CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF enabled?
libbpf: failed to find valid kernel BTF
libbpf: Error loading vmlinux BTF: -ESRCH
libbpf: failed to load BPF skeleton 'lock_contention_bpf': -ESRCH
Failed to load lock-contention BPF skeleton
lock contention BPF setup failed

Tycho