mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
	kan.liang@linux.intel.com, davidcc@google.com,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf/core: Fix WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->ctx.nr_cgroups == 0) in perf_cgroup_switch
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 12:00:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250604100052.GH38114@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250604033924.3914647-3-luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>

On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 03:39:24AM +0000, Luo Gengkun wrote:
> 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);
> 
> To fix this problem, expand the lock-holding critical section in
> perf_cgroup_switch.
> 
> Fixes: db4a835601b7 ("perf/core: Set cgroup in CPU contexts for new cgroup events")
> Signed-off-by: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com>
> ---

Right, so how about we simply re-check the condition once we take the
lock?

Also, take the opportunity to convert to guard instead of adding goto
unlock.

--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -207,6 +207,19 @@ static void perf_ctx_unlock(struct perf_
 	__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)
 
 static bool is_kernel_event(struct perf_event *event)
@@ -944,7 +957,13 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct ta
 	if (READ_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp) == cgrp)
 		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);
 
 	ctx_sched_out(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
@@ -962,7 +981,6 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct ta
 	ctx_sched_in(&cpuctx->ctx, NULL, EVENT_ALL|EVENT_CGROUP);
 
 	perf_ctx_enable(&cpuctx->ctx, true);
-	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
 }
 
 static int perf_cgroup_ensure_storage(struct perf_event *event,

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-04 10:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-04  3:39 [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix perf cgroup problem Luo Gengkun
2025-06-04  3:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] perf/core: Fix nr_cgroups/cpuctx->cgrp is not updated correctly Luo Gengkun
2025-06-04  9:19   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04  9:42     ` Luo Gengkun
2025-06-04  3:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] perf/core: Fix WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->ctx.nr_cgroups == 0) in perf_cgroup_switch Luo Gengkun
2025-06-04 10:00   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-06-05  3:55     ` Luo Gengkun
2025-06-05  7:36       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-11  9:29   ` [tip: perf/urgent] perf/core: Fix WARN in perf_cgroup_switch() tip-bot2 for Luo Gengkun
2025-06-26 13:08     ` Luo Gengkun
2025-06-26 13:13       ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250604100052.GH38114@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=davidcc@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luogengkun@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®