From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Mohamed Ayman" <mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_cpu_pm_notify()
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 22:05:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260716220509.351B01F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260716214155.2049564-1-mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Calling put_device() inside a raw spinlock atomic context in coresight_put_percpu_source_ref() causes a system crash on PREEMPT_RT.
- [High] Double-decrement of hardware refcounts for links/sinks when a device is unregistered while the CPU is idle.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_cpu_pm_notify() ---
commit cbdaaaf0779f6cae5c8595e4a2bcad24b819e017
Author: Mohamed Ayman <mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_cpu_pm_notify()
This commit modifies coresight_cpu_get_active_path() to avoid calling
coresight_get_percpu_source_ref() and coresight_put_percpu_source_ref()
during CPU PM transitions. Instead, it reads the per-cpu source pointer
directly under the coresight_dev_lock raw spinlock to prevent potential
sleeping in atomic context on PREEMPT_RT.
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
> index 6d65c43d574fd..713bcff53bf4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
> @@ -1850,25 +1850,15 @@ static void coresight_release_device_list(void)
> static struct coresight_path *coresight_cpu_get_active_path(enum cs_mode mode)
> {
> struct coresight_device *source;
> - bool is_active = false;
> + struct coresight_path *path = NULL;
>
> - source = coresight_get_percpu_source_ref(smp_processor_id());
> - if (!source)
> - return NULL;
> -
> - if (coresight_get_mode(source) & mode)
> - is_active = true;
> + guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&coresight_dev_lock);
>
> - coresight_put_percpu_source_ref(source);
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but while this change fixes the
issue for the PM notifier by removing the get/put dance, does the same
"scheduling while atomic" problem still exist in
coresight_put_percpu_source_ref() for other callers?
In coresight_put_percpu_source_ref():
guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&coresight_dev_lock);
...
put_device(&csdev->dev);
This unconditionally acquires coresight_dev_lock as a raw spinlock and calls
put_device(). If concurrent device unregistration occurs, this put_device()
call can drop the final kobject reference, triggering
coresight_device_release().
This calls free_percpu(), which acquires sleepable locks on PREEMPT_RT,
causing a panic. Are there plans to address this remaining put_device()
call under a raw spinlock?
> + source = per_cpu(csdev_source, smp_processor_id());
> + if (source && (coresight_get_mode(source) & mode))
> + path = source->path;
>
> - /*
> - * It is expected to run in atomic context or with the CPU lock held for
> - * sysfs mode, so it cannot be preempted to disable the path. Here
> - * returns the active path pointer without concern that its state may
> - * change. Since the build path has taken a reference on the component,
> - * the path can be safely used by the caller.
> - */
> - return is_active ? source->path : NULL;
> + return path;
> }
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this PM logic cause a permanent
double-decrement of hardware refcounts if a trace device is unregistered
while the CPU is idle?
When the CPU goes idle, coresight_cpu_pm_notify() runs CPU_PM_ENTER and calls
coresight_pm_save(path). This disables components along the active trace path
and decrements their reference counts.
If the trace driver is concurrently unbound on another CPU,
coresight_unregister() clears the csdev_source per-CPU pointer.
When the idle CPU wakes up, coresight_cpu_pm_notify(CPU_PM_EXIT) calls
coresight_cpu_get_active_path(). Because the pointer was cleared, this
returns NULL.
Consequently, coresight_pm_restore() is skipped, and the hardware refcounts
are never incremented back:
struct coresight_path *path =
coresight_cpu_get_active_path(CS_MODE_SYSFS | CS_MODE_PERF);
int ret;
ret = coresight_pm_is_needed(path); // returns 0 if path is NULL
if (ret <= 0)
return ret ? NOTIFY_BAD : NOTIFY_DONE; // Skips restore
When the trace session is later explicitly closed, coresight_disable_path()
executes and decrements those refcounts again.
Does this cause an underflow that permanently disables shared hardware
components for all cores?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260716214155.2049564-1-mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-16 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-12 21:04 [PATCH] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_device_release() Mohamed Ayman
2026-07-12 21:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-13 3:07 ` Jie Gan
2026-07-13 23:00 ` [PATCH v2] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_put_percpu_source_ref() Mohamed Ayman
2026-07-13 23:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:42 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-14 19:42 ` MOHAMED AYMAN
2026-07-15 6:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-16 3:07 ` MOHAMED AYMAN
2026-07-16 12:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-16 21:41 ` [PATCH v3] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_cpu_pm_notify() Mohamed Ayman
2026-07-16 22:05 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-17 8:14 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-17 10:49 ` Leo Yan
2026-07-17 15:58 ` Leo Yan
2026-07-17 16:12 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20260716220509.351B01F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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