mirror of
git://git.yoctoproject.org/linux-yocto.git
synced 2025-08-22 00:42:01 +02:00
perf/core: Fix WARN in perf_cgroup_switch()
There may be concurrency between perf_cgroup_switch and
perf_cgroup_event_disable. Consider the following scenario: after a new
perf cgroup event is created on CPU0, the new event may not trigger
a reprogramming, causing ctx->is_active to be 0. In this case, when CPU1
disables this perf event, it executes __perf_remove_from_context->
list _del_event->perf_cgroup_event_disable on CPU1, which causes a race
with perf_cgroup_switch running on CPU0.
The following describes the details of this concurrency scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
perf_cgroup_switch:
...
# cpuctx->cgrp is not NULL here
if (READ_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp) == NULL)
return;
perf_remove_from_context:
...
raw_spin_lock_irq(&ctx->lock);
...
# ctx->is_active == 0 because reprogramm is not
# tigger, so CPU1 can do __perf_remove_from_context
# for CPU0
__perf_remove_from_context:
perf_cgroup_event_disable:
...
if (--ctx->nr_cgroups)
...
# this warning will happened because CPU1 changed
# ctx.nr_cgroups to 0.
WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->ctx.nr_cgroups == 0);
[peterz: use guard instead of goto unlock]
Fixes: db4a835601
("perf/core: Set cgroup in CPU contexts for new cgroup events")
Signed-off-by: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250604033924.3914647-3-luogengkun@huaweicloud.com
This commit is contained in:
parent
3b7a34aebb
commit
3172fb9866
|
@ -207,6 +207,19 @@ static void perf_ctx_unlock(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx,
|
||||||
__perf_ctx_unlock(&cpuctx->ctx);
|
__perf_ctx_unlock(&cpuctx->ctx);
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
typedef struct {
|
||||||
|
struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx;
|
||||||
|
struct perf_event_context *ctx;
|
||||||
|
} class_perf_ctx_lock_t;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
static inline void class_perf_ctx_lock_destructor(class_perf_ctx_lock_t *_T)
|
||||||
|
{ perf_ctx_unlock(_T->cpuctx, _T->ctx); }
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
static inline class_perf_ctx_lock_t
|
||||||
|
class_perf_ctx_lock_constructor(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx,
|
||||||
|
struct perf_event_context *ctx)
|
||||||
|
{ perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, ctx); return (class_perf_ctx_lock_t){ cpuctx, ctx }; }
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#define TASK_TOMBSTONE ((void *)-1L)
|
#define TASK_TOMBSTONE ((void *)-1L)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
static bool is_kernel_event(struct perf_event *event)
|
static bool is_kernel_event(struct perf_event *event)
|
||||||
|
@ -944,7 +957,13 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
|
||||||
if (READ_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp) == cgrp)
|
if (READ_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp) == cgrp)
|
||||||
return;
|
return;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
|
guard(perf_ctx_lock)(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
|
||||||
|
/*
|
||||||
|
* Re-check, could've raced vs perf_remove_from_context().
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
if (READ_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp) == NULL)
|
||||||
|
return;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
perf_ctx_disable(&cpuctx->ctx, true);
|
perf_ctx_disable(&cpuctx->ctx, true);
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
ctx_sched_out(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
|
ctx_sched_out(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
|
||||||
|
@ -962,7 +981,6 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task)
|
||||||
ctx_sched_in(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
|
ctx_sched_in(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
perf_ctx_enable(&cpuctx->ctx, true);
|
perf_ctx_enable(&cpuctx->ctx, true);
|
||||||
perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
|
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
static int perf_cgroup_ensure_storage(struct perf_event *event,
|
static int perf_cgroup_ensure_storage(struct perf_event *event,
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user