Re: [PATCH v12 02/11] x86/hw_breakpoints: Add arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() API

Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, 07 Aug 2026 15:50:50 +0000
[email protected] wrote:

> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr updates the hardware and shadow registers but fails to update the perf_event's canonical software state, leading to silent hardware reverts and incorrect event samples.
> --
> 
> --- Patch [2]: [PATCH v12 02/11] x86/hw_breakpoints: Add arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() API ---
> commit bbc277e839d1fd31bb4bfa9d695721e5b6899bf6
> Author: Jinchao Wang <[email protected]>
> 
> x86/hw_breakpoints: Add arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() API
>     
> Wprobe needs to move an active per-CPU watchpoint without releasing and
> reserving its hardware slot.
>     
> Add arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr() to find the installed local
> slot and update only its address shadow and hardware debug address
> register. Publish the shadow first so hw_breakpoint_restore() observes
> the new address if an NMI interrupts the update.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/59637b96946653393a7ad3c7de094094796b39c2.1785067572.git.wangjinchao600@gmail.com/
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> > index 9ef24b55737f8..c89f6e71c3a91 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > @@ -128,6 +128,39 @@ int arch_install_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp)
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +int arch_modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr(struct perf_event *bp,
> > +					  unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > +	struct arch_hw_breakpoint hw;
> > +	struct perf_event_attr attr = bp->attr;
> > +	unsigned int seq;
> > +	int i, ret;
> > +
> > +	lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > +
> > +	attr.bp_addr = addr;
> > +	ret = hw_breakpoint_arch_parse(bp, &attr, &hw);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> 
> [Severity: High]
> Does this discard the validated software state?
> 
> The new address configuration is successfully validated into the local 'hw'
> struct, but neither the architecture-specific state (counter_arch_bp(bp))
> nor the core attribute (bp->attr.bp_addr) are updated.

Yes, if it is sololy used. But in the 3rd patch, this function is only
called from modify_local_hw_breakpoint_addr(), which updates
counter_arch_bp(bp)->address. I will add this as a comment.

> 
> If the breakpoint is later re-installed (e.g., during CPU offline/online or
> PMU scheduling), arch_install_hw_breakpoint() will read the stale address:
> 
>     struct arch_hw_breakpoint *info = counter_arch_bp(bp);
>     ...
>     this_cpu_write(cpu_debugreg[i], info->address);
>     barrier();
>     set_debugreg(info->address, i);
> 
> Could this silently revert the hardware register back to the old address?
> 
> Also, if a watchpoint fires, perf_bp_event() initializes the sample record
> using the unmodified bp->attr.bp_addr. Could this result in reporting
> incorrect addresses in the trace output?

trace_wprobe ensures the hit address and modified bp->attr.bp_addr are the
same. So there should be no problem.

Thanks,

> 
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < HBP_NUM; i++) {
> > +		if (this_cpu_read(bp_per_reg[i]) == bp)
> > +			break;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (WARN_ONCE(i == HBP_NUM, "Can't find any breakpoint slot"))
> > +		return -ENOENT;
> > +
> > +	do {
> > +		seq = this_cpu_inc_return(cpu_dr7_seq);
> > +		this_cpu_write(cpu_debugreg[i], addr);
> > +		barrier();
> > +		set_debugreg(addr, i);
> > +	} while (seq != this_cpu_read(cpu_dr7_seq));
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> -- 
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/178611679753.237811.10190793347982785419.stgit@devnote2?part=2


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.