Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/amd/lbr: Limit branch snapshots to valid entries

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 12:14:58PM +0530, Sandipan Das wrote:
> On 12-10-2026 21:00, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 07, 2026 at 11:40:02PM +0530, Sandipan Das wrote:
> >> The branch snapshot callback used by bpf_get_branch_snapshot() copies
> >> up to x86_pmu.lbr_nr entries from cpuc->lbr_entries[], even when the
> >> last LBR read kept fewer branches. The entries past lbr_stack.nr are
> >> invalid, but they end up reaching BPF programs.
> >>
> >> Limit copying to lbr_stack.nr entries and also reset lbr_stack.nr when
> >> amd_pmu_lbr_read() skips reading the registers, so that a stale count
> >> is never reused.
> >>
> >> Fixes: a4d18112e531 ("perf/x86/amd: Support capturing LBR from software events")
> >> Reported-by: Sashiko <sashiko-bot@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/sashiko-outbox-163130@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >> Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@xxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/x86/events/amd/core.c | 2 +-
> >>  arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c  | 4 +++-
> >>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c b/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> index 49b6b8fce566..bf631f60757c 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> @@ -944,7 +944,7 @@ static int amd_pmu_v2_snapshot_branch_stack(struct perf_branch_entry *entries, u
> >>  	cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> >>  
> >>  	amd_pmu_lbr_read();
> >> -	cnt = min(cnt, x86_pmu.lbr_nr);
> >> +	cnt = min(cnt, cpuc->lbr_stack.nr);
> >>  	memcpy(entries, cpuc->lbr_entries, sizeof(struct perf_branch_entry) * cnt);
> >>  
> >>  	amd_pmu_v2_enable_all(0);
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
> >> index 1e1b2f08cb51..a00d3850c4a8 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
> >> @@ -165,8 +165,10 @@ void amd_pmu_lbr_read(void)
> >>  	struct branch_entry entry;
> >>  	int out = 0, idx, i;
> >>  
> >> -	if (!cpuc->lbr_users)
> >> +	if (!cpuc->lbr_users) {
> >> +		cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;
> >>  		return;
> >> +	}
> >>  
> >>  	for (i = 0; i < x86_pmu.lbr_nr; i++) {
> >>  		entry.from.full	= amd_pmu_lbr_get_from(i);
> > 
> > You now seem to deviate from what the Intel code does. Please clarify.
> 
> Yes, it is a deviation. I thought of proposing the following but didn't
> proceed because I was not sure about the if condition in the second hunk
> which considers things other than cpuc->lbr_users for an early return.

Dapeng, can you look into this? I would really like to keep behaviour
consistent where possible.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index 0a34d674df59..5dfb9e9156e8 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -2822,7 +2822,7 @@ __intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack(struct perf_branch_entry *entries,
>         struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> 
>         intel_pmu_lbr_read();
> -       cnt = min_t(unsigned int, cnt, x86_pmu.lbr_nr);
> +       cnt = min_t(unsigned int, cnt, cpuc->lbr_stack.nr);
> 
>         memcpy(entries, cpuc->lbr_entries, sizeof(struct perf_branch_entry) * cnt);
>         intel_pmu_enable_all(0);
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> index 0b446d8912e4..6b070490f461 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> @@ -1026,8 +1026,10 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_read(void)
>          * but this simple approach seems to work for now.
>          */
>         if (!cpuc->lbr_users || vlbr_exclude_host() ||
> -           cpuc->lbr_users == cpuc->lbr_pebs_users)
> +           cpuc->lbr_users == cpuc->lbr_pebs_users) {
> +               cpuc->lbr_stack.nr = 0;
>                 return;
> +       }
> 
>         x86_pmu.lbr_read(cpuc);
>