From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B421B14884C; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:18:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737127135; cv=none; b=BDu5CqcKJqx3fnECiybemJpR20+H9q9FsJD/LcA9MJwAo1fcj3MRem0LQGVgJGX+qnjGZdfvfh/LFzyOlhV33zPBeUz68/4UogvCjKsvxHZwcMCXx7B2/nEgINmGI4azNi/7AajysuN3KSzgs7MFJ+xrGX54N6hiqbOewOo2PDE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737127135; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ccZPE7fqhciJeBEtguK8eWJ8wR1KZE2kbEW/4xZB99Y=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=CWNcJeyaVXdyx1n0OH7zNRQZKRNTSBZs8Zw+H7nNdjgaTJB2RkYovndv/OeoPNS4eXk/Zbn9kHb1/jcY20r4hNTMrXJC3ylBhuSo1K5I/jPPa95N5goqbJFiYJfb1kmR3ciengY5VF/kxoKGxgBqIoiRzuLuJRlplF+2LrWr+tg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=iKRKDEgc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="iKRKDEgc" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1737127134; x=1768663134; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ccZPE7fqhciJeBEtguK8eWJ8wR1KZE2kbEW/4xZB99Y=; b=iKRKDEgc0oYTor5yFB6FhB1LmDP2qlpfAqjfqM9z8qzkPyWI3KVYS3qT JwyB7ukjQuL/h/d3pEQalNxD91yPsUmCQxtx+lG3Ejz8nz2ebqDzoZFDp N55Q9qT1BGlW3QfsTN4DtqNq+S4KiUFiuo2HFtNAdtsWXJXTbFG+Ai+X4 9XRbQkdibX5o+sIshnhfUzGiYKbUHtZ4hN04QrXRV2pONlrUU1KRRVIVt kZTq54BqEcOa/07mn+4AFQigDKkxxkjU3RXpJftzeyWAYidTkvT7fwWok kDGVO7RHCsO4qvXhUAP8IZn36eekMclOeYzsjnObH1p5EPSy8VltH+l5Y Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: I0J2ZhJhS2yQ0lFFHNKxLg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CgYmS2ktSsyjN3o6QHCyYw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11318"; a="37798351" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,212,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="37798351" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jan 2025 07:18:51 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: oW9l30i0SlaY7wgr04LkVw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: gD5WkwFJQYq4N1oL+LpqkA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="106292023" Received: from kanliang-dev.jf.intel.com ([10.165.154.102]) by orviesa007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Jan 2025 07:18:51 -0800 From: kan.liang@linux.intel.com To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Cc: ak@linux.intel.com, ravi.bangoria@amd.com, jolsa@redhat.com, Kan Liang , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 2/3] perf: Fix low freq setting via IOC_PERIOD Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 07:19:12 -0800 Message-Id: <20250117151913.3043942-2-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.38.1 In-Reply-To: <20250117151913.3043942-1-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> References: <20250117151913.3043942-1-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Kan Liang A low freq cannot be set via IOC_PERIOD on some platforms. The perf_event_check_period() introduced in commit 81ec3f3c4c4d ("perf/x86: Add check_period PMU callback") intended to check the period, rather than the freq. A low freq may be mistakenly rejected by the limit_period(). Fixes: 81ec3f3c4c4d ("perf/x86: Add check_period PMU callback") Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250115154949.3147-1-ravi.bangoria@amd.com/ Signed-off-by: Kan Liang Cc: Jiri Olsa Cc: Ravi Bangoria Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org --- kernel/events/core.c | 17 +++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c index f91ba29048ce..a9a04d4f3619 100644 --- a/kernel/events/core.c +++ b/kernel/events/core.c @@ -5960,14 +5960,15 @@ static int _perf_event_period(struct perf_event *event, u64 value) if (!value) return -EINVAL; - if (event->attr.freq && value > sysctl_perf_event_sample_rate) - return -EINVAL; - - if (perf_event_check_period(event, value)) - return -EINVAL; - - if (!event->attr.freq && (value & (1ULL << 63))) - return -EINVAL; + if (event->attr.freq) { + if (value > sysctl_perf_event_sample_rate) + return -EINVAL; + } else { + if (perf_event_check_period(event, value)) + return -EINVAL; + if (value & (1ULL << 63)) + return -EINVAL; + } event_function_call(event, __perf_event_period, &value); -- 2.38.1