From nobody Fri Dec 19 13:49:04 2025 Received: from mail-pl1-f173.google.com (mail-pl1-f173.google.com [209.85.214.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E92AB155C83; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:07:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743088040; cv=none; b=c4HUW9VbOT5aJ0LacaoT2KICSCtiw7OH3jZcX9uaqvYbE/cxzaKCpDKRBSkYzqu6H+4hquxSYtv6InPlgCVH5WfyqnsWSco+apVTRoBsH5k7J+Z6BisYrSN30FXfkW0HZZQTWy8ziVTll0GCavjVz2/n7tJwrwo7JGK865y9Hk0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743088040; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IGOlgbMnyFjkmCr7mrACZlNpeHBjA6HM1S444NLVEa0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=FUxsTIWgHcA+97W/msfKRGAHdHs9qrinLt9qI+BWDdAsp7M42c90aw6TK62DILjnmTiBD4uGrR+Hv9Cx4v5IIbHDWDqBg2M5idcqiXb3+ld2d97La6OS+QVUjfgMn2OPXwL7Ae/67A81qbTZ+sQ481PiDKT1WffSy58eiFlktGQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=ntCX2k47; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ntCX2k47" Received: by mail-pl1-f173.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-22401f4d35aso26633015ad.2; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:07:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1743088038; x=1743692838; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QSnBFPCz6EJRCbgAs1hUwvMtKdYF2dHvHQTAU0FhBus=; b=ntCX2k476oVP0dkVEFl6ftmw6mEnHZudai6WekoJOUtZvNRLVUUHXwEApHKiyIwMLi OAmHjRvJA07jHpQdoxWq0ApOex1+QM2JT0Rd4Y2hMpz338hVPeGr2dLG5qRBGK1b0RQ7 8Hgi/cZl3/DKUaI/ToAGBZ7g79wLO3y7U+svgH9tHFXGHF0phfOALdetaMXeNhix7J5z Jti4gAaIu92GkQy0xH4H64xa4KazgbNCP+p1Y+dKMiCETMHLBR1GXEWv0LCgEvXnzSnJ w+5INFCKLYSAeZ7a7UvlHMZF947vUtSKYcD8InZdYhdLfYhGErqOjJGIZVz1ZKM/pb1s hS+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743088038; x=1743692838; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=QSnBFPCz6EJRCbgAs1hUwvMtKdYF2dHvHQTAU0FhBus=; b=JWnQXcUvSgPHKQdXyg68NGGRNEgeOPBRJAVTJFluQn5ahLuc/DsMVIyMFvUKtdif0d LmOyLXCuJWCvpHc/v+i5uPD6kAL+xC+NZkHJ4Q0jw2EfizcRQumtWzOD0j3OJYB/slq3 hh8S2JpGBI1gu2HQ0zYIYLVJpZvQ1fsaOjxrYe3f/oGVS+3w6MVU+OAUltEEUQiI6Ghf yh6HFzL3kgsosC2J6PV+4RSvsYoHl02h+TL6hb4/JU+spd9HhdSVkfz8Pj/Rs/5iQ1Rr eRNIN7PQ7qkKl8szbPl1zfDOanTRHv/x1dDmTZqR2tF/ov8Cd5nfzDPap/opqGLc+Gl9 MWSA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX41kzbJQ1uDwOK2wS1dvTFERn/KCxi/QKOShWHXhJA3lBfxlfj1gFY0FnCpDzSf2Ekl87O7UyWT1eWuCYChYeyXQ==@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCXoc3z3kzcPQkqI+Jr/qVrQYTtztZMlc1dTBHXrQDlcJstjma8j+vFCQJZtoObTRFg9ijjKwUaqOqFUeOg=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwRV+GrghVGZxuytiXOyBrlmXm20+1dJAdRPfAdwPTtabfKjwEJ bgm2m+tQItiCqGYS0E79nuTQS5zHrt7GWR3Q8rUvQUs0kBt8FxGp X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuppzc5in7hY/FKr3ZAh1kZ461Cy2X/I1ai9CKlufSQWLa5wFPON4AjvaTcBDh mMoLP0xc0/HLK6NN6ptVASXWosnBnbGJ8EpyRKJkf6f36cy9qbfVJ2W60+ZROTbQlSVM1Ulyhfl +KEy7zQLk6Ry7p2O6TZpFGJFsOPFo6eRRPfOk3n8bH65qdjgjmeTYL/TR/tpMV5X54Ir+EBx5B4 pgwRHUQIgyXD4Vk6ntDxCM0FJZrGQC4UCcUAIIQELOhcLIBgNP34ShfBfdwoN2ZAZfSmAXMHsSz E8buL1/TD+YZNKb+Vqv9yqf30bEpruFgSYyWWMKy1Gv19nf8P7RLOV5VV/P+37/WHkVzXuKICyf K/JLF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHQoplcEatDuFtcOhE2bWxxvWKhWtII0JknPc4UIIl7hdymWZ+PnM1/9vGYGnqb7EbmmsAikg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:1988:b0:223:325c:89f6 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2280488be77mr58686565ad.10.1743088037862; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:07:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from howard.lan (c-73-202-46-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.202.46.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-2291eedea0asm670635ad.73.2025.03.27.08.07.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:07:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Howard Chu To: acme@kernel.org Cc: mingo@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com, peterz@infradead.org, kan.liang@linux.intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Howard Chu Subject: [PATCH v4] perf trace: Fix possible insufficient allocation of argument formats Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:07:12 -0700 Message-ID: <20250327150712.1966188-1-howardchu95@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.45.2 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" In my previous fix of runtime error(Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/20250122025519.361873-1-howardchu9= 5@gmail.com/), I made a mistake of decrementing one unconditionally, regardless of whether an extra 'syscall_nr' or 'nr' field was present in libtraceevent's tp_format. This may cause perf trace to allocate one fewer arg_fmt entry than needed for the accurate representation of syscall arguments. This patch corrects the mistake by checking the presence of'syscall_nr' or 'nr', and adjusting the length of arg_fmt[] accordingly. Signed-off-by: Howard Chu Suggested-by: Namhyung Kim Fixes: c7b87ce0dd10 ("perf trace: Fix runtime error of index out of bounds") Changes in v4: - Make the patch apply Changes in v3: - Add 'Fixes:' tag Changes in v2: - Simplify the code (written by Namhyung) tools/perf/builtin-trace.c | 16 +++++----------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c b/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c index a102748bd0c9..439e152186da 100644 --- a/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c @@ -2022,9 +2022,6 @@ static int syscall__alloc_arg_fmts(struct syscall *sc= , int nr_args) { int idx; =20 - if (nr_args =3D=3D RAW_SYSCALL_ARGS_NUM && sc->fmt && sc->fmt->nr_args != =3D 0) - nr_args =3D sc->fmt->nr_args; - sc->arg_fmt =3D calloc(nr_args, sizeof(*sc->arg_fmt)); if (sc->arg_fmt =3D=3D NULL) return -1; @@ -2034,7 +2031,6 @@ static int syscall__alloc_arg_fmts(struct syscall *sc= , int nr_args) sc->arg_fmt[idx] =3D sc->fmt->arg[idx]; } =20 - sc->nr_args =3D nr_args; return 0; } =20 @@ -2176,14 +2172,9 @@ static int syscall__read_info(struct syscall *sc, st= ruct trace *trace) return err; } =20 - /* - * The tracepoint format contains __syscall_nr field, so it's one more - * than the actual number of syscall arguments. - */ - if (syscall__alloc_arg_fmts(sc, sc->tp_format->format.nr_fields - 1)) - return -ENOMEM; - sc->args =3D sc->tp_format->format.fields; + sc->nr_args =3D sc->tp_format->format.nr_fields; + /* * We need to check and discard the first variable '__syscall_nr' * or 'nr' that mean the syscall number. It is needless here. @@ -2194,6 +2185,9 @@ static int syscall__read_info(struct syscall *sc, str= uct trace *trace) --sc->nr_args; } =20 + if (syscall__alloc_arg_fmts(sc, sc->nr_args)) + return -ENOMEM; + sc->is_exit =3D !strcmp(name, "exit_group") || !strcmp(name, "exit"); sc->is_open =3D !strcmp(name, "open") || !strcmp(name, "openat"); =20 --=20 2.45.2