[RFC][PATCH 2/2] Fix evsel.c misaligned address errors

[Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo]

The ubsan (undefined behavior sanitizer) build of perf throws
misaligned address erros during 'Sample parsing function' in
perf test.

To reproduce, run:
make -C tools/perf USE_CLANG=1 EXTRA_CFLAGS="-fsanitize=undefined"

(see the cover letter for why perf may not build)

then run: tools/perf/perf test 26 -v

Most of the misaligned address errors come from improperly assigning
values to the u64 array in the 'perf_event__synthesize_sample'
function. These are easily fixed by changing the assignments
to use memcpy instead.

In the 'perf_evsel__parse_sample' function, the 'u64* array'
variable has varying numbers of bytes added to it depending on
which if statements it passes. Since this function is called
multiple times under different conditions, the 'array' variable
is sometimes misaligned by 4 bytes and sometimes not. This causes
issues when 'data->branch_stack' is later assigned to an element
in the array.

In the case that the array is misaligned we can add 4 bytes to the
array to realign it. This still causes an incorrect perf data file
(so the test still fails with the ubsan build) but it at least
gets rid of the error.

Comments?

Not-Quite-Signed-off-by: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo <nums@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
index dbc0466db368..a1289fcbbb2d 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
@@ -2288,6 +2288,11 @@ int perf_evsel__parse_sample(struct perf_evsel *evsel, union perf_event *event,
 					  sizeof(struct branch_entry);
 
 		OVERFLOW_CHECK_u64(array);
+		if ((((u64)array) & 7) != 0)
+			array = (void *)array + sizeof(u32);
+
+		assert((((u64)array) & 7) == 0);
+		
 		data->branch_stack = (struct branch_stack *)array++;
 
 		if (data->branch_stack->nr > max_branch_nr)
@@ -2646,7 +2651,8 @@ int perf_event__synthesize_sample(union perf_event *event, u64 type,
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
 		if (sample->user_regs.abi) {
-			*array++ = sample->user_regs.abi;
+			memcpy(array++, &sample->user_regs.abi,
+				sizeof(sample->user_regs.abi));
 			sz = hweight_long(sample->user_regs.mask) * sizeof(u64);
 			memcpy(array, sample->user_regs.regs, sz);
 			array = (void *)array + sz;
@@ -2657,32 +2663,31 @@ int perf_event__synthesize_sample(union perf_event *event, u64 type,
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER) {
 		sz = sample->user_stack.size;
-		*array++ = sz;
+		memcpy(array++, &sz, sizeof(sample->user_stack.size));
 		if (sz) {
 			memcpy(array, sample->user_stack.data, sz);
 			array = (void *)array + sz;
-			*array++ = sz;
+			memcpy(array++, &sz, sizeof(sz));
 		}
 	}
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT) {
-		*array = sample->weight;
-		array++;
+		memcpy(array++, &sample->weight, sizeof(sample->weight));
 	}
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC) {
-		*array = sample->data_src;
-		array++;
+		memcpy(array++, &sample->data_src, sizeof(sample->data_src));
 	}
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_TRANSACTION) {
-		*array = sample->transaction;
-		array++;
+		memcpy(array++, &sample->transaction,
+			sizeof(sample->transaction));
 	}
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_INTR) {
 		if (sample->intr_regs.abi) {
-			*array++ = sample->intr_regs.abi;
+			memcpy(array++, &sample->intr_regs.abi,
+				sizeof(sample->intr_regs.abi));
 			sz = hweight_long(sample->intr_regs.mask) * sizeof(u64);
 			memcpy(array, sample->intr_regs.regs, sz);
 			array = (void *)array + sz;
@@ -2692,8 +2697,7 @@ int perf_event__synthesize_sample(union perf_event *event, u64 type,
 	}
 
 	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_PHYS_ADDR) {
-		*array = sample->phys_addr;
-		array++;
+		memcpy(array++, &sample->phys_addr, sizeof(sample->phys_addr));
 	}
 
 	return 0;
-- 
2.22.0.657.g960e92d24f-goog