4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> [ Upstream commit 18e7a45af91acdde99d3aa1372cc40e1f8142f7b ] As Peter suggested [1] rejecting non sampling PEBS events, because they dont make any sense and could cause bugs in the NMI handler [2]. [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170103094059.GC3093@worktop [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <[email protected]> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> Cc: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> Cc: Stephane Eranian <[email protected]> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> Cc: Vince Weaver <[email protected]> Cc: Vince Weaver <[email protected]> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170103142454.GA26251@krava Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> --- arch/x86/events/core.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) --- a/arch/x86/events/core.c +++ b/arch/x86/events/core.c @@ -505,6 +505,10 @@ int x86_pmu_hw_config(struct perf_event if (event->attr.precise_ip > precise) return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + /* There's no sense in having PEBS for non sampling events: */ + if (!is_sampling_event(event)) + return -EINVAL; } /* * check that PEBS LBR correction does not conflict with
