mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: paulmck@kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>,
	rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Chris Mason <clm@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] fprobe, rcu/tasks, rhashtable: Switch fprobe and BPF kprobe-multi to Tasks-Rude RCU
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 08:28:28 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260929082828.cd9844b5e632a23fd8308dbf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f593867e-dcef-4f68-b609-a253f489f7b8@paulmck-laptop>

On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:25:02 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 11:29:13PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Here is an RFC patch series which removes standard RCU read lock
> > (guard(rcu) and rcu_read_lock()) from fprobe callback paths
> > by switching fprobe and BPF multi-kprobe to Tasks-Rude RCU.
> > 
> > Motivation & Problem
> > ====================
> > 
> > Currently, fprobe entry and exit callbacks (fprobe_fgraph_entry,
> > fprobe_return, and fprobe_ftrace_entry) execute in the tracing hot
> > path where preemption is disabled.
> > 
> > However, fprobe was forced to wrap hash lookups with guard(rcu)() and
> > rcu_read_lock() because:
> > 
> > - rhashtable defers bucket table deallocation using standard RCU
> > - unregister_fprobe() and BPF waited for a standard RCU grace period
> > 
> > Taking standard RCU read locks in the tracing fast path introduces
> > several drawbacks:
> > 
> > 1. Unnecessary Runtime Overhead:
> >    Every probe hit manipulates current->rcu_read_lock_nesting with
> >    memory barriers, and rcu_read_unlock() adds conditional branches
> >    to check for special quiescent processing.
> >    On debug kernels with CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y or CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y,
> >    this additionally acquires and releases lockdep maps on every hit,
> >    introducing severe lockdep hashing overhead and tracer recursion risks.
> > 
> > 2. Fragile Dependency on rcu_is_watching():
> >    Standard RCU treats idle CPUs (and user-space on nohz_full CPUs) as
> >    Extended Quiescent States (EQS). If a function is traced while
> >    rcu_is_watching() is false, standard RCU is blind to the read-side
> >    critical section. In such contexts, synchronize_rcu() does not wait
> >    for the reader (risking Use-After-Free), and lockdep emits an
> >    "RCU-illegal: rcu_read_lock() used while not watching!" warning.
> >    To avoid this, ftrace callbacks normally require FTRACE_OPS_FL_RCU,
> >    adding extra trampoline check overhead.
> > 
> > 3. Asymmetric Synchronization with fprobe_return():
> >    fprobe_return() executes under preempt_disable_notrace() without
> >    holding rcu_read_lock(). Prior to this series, unregister_fprobe()
> >    only waited on synchronize_rcu(), which does NOT wait for pure
> >    preempt-disabled sections, leaving a potential Use-After-Free window
> >    during probe unregistration.
> > 
> > I've tried to fix the last UAF with simply introducing guard(rcu)()[1]
> > but Sashiko found the 2nd problem [2]. So I decided to implement this
> > series.
> 
> Unless I am missing something subtle, Sashiko needs to be taught a
> little bit more about RCU.  Preemption-disabled regions of code really
> are valid RCU readers.  If you have a reproducer showing that this is
> not the case in some situation, that would be a bug in RCU.

Thanks for the clarification!
So I think we can replace rcu_read_lock() with rcu_read_lock_sched_notrace()?
(also, maybe we need to add rcu_is_watching() check)
Current code may involves lockdep in fprobe, that is not good.

BTW, if we want to trace some code in extended quiescent state, do we
still need this Tasks-Rude RCU?

Thank you,

> 
> Adding Roman Gushchin and Chris Mason on CC for their thoughts.
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/179055575009.241711.6358052647499787191.stgit@devnote2/
> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260928005114.9C9FC1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org/
> > 
> > 
> > Solution: Tasks-Rude RCU
> > ========================
> > 
> > Because fprobe callbacks already run strictly within preempt-disabled
> > contexts, we can transition fprobe and its deferred table reclamation
> > to Tasks-Rude RCU:
> > 
> > - Tasks-Rude RCU detects grace periods via schedule_on_each_cpu(),
> >   forcing a schedule on every online CPU. This guarantees that all
> >   preempt-disabled sections that began prior to the grace period have
> >   completed before memory is reclaimed.
> > - Unlike standard RCU, Tasks-Rude RCU does not rely on dyntick-idle /
> >   EQS tracking. It does NOT require rcu_is_watching() to be true and
> >   does not trigger lockdep warnings in pre-RCU/idle execution paths.
> > - Within fprobe, guard(rcu)() is replaced with guard(rcu_sched_notrace)(),
> >   reducing the lookup lock to pure, non-tracing preempt counter
> >   increments without lockdep or RCU state manipulation.
> > 
> > Feedback and suggestions from RCU, BPF, and tracing maintainers are welcome!
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > ---
> > base-commit: 5bfa9f1a9dcb6ecb607adbc1c0226605c972935b
> > 
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) (3):
> >       rcu/tasks: Export call_rcu_tasks_rude()
> >       rhashtable: Add use_tasks_rude parameter to defer bucket table free
> >       fprobe: Switch fprobe and BPF kprobe-multi to Tasks-Rude RCU
> > 
> > 
> >  include/linux/rcupdate.h         |    6 +++
> >  include/linux/rhashtable-types.h |    2 +
> >  kernel/bpf/syscall.c             |    2 +
> >  kernel/rcu/tasks.h               |    8 ++---
> >  kernel/trace/fprobe.c            |   66 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> >  lib/rhashtable.c                 |    5 ++-
> >  6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-28 23:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-28 14:29 Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-28 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] rcu/tasks: Export call_rcu_tasks_rude() Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-28 15:17   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-28 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] rhashtable: Add use_tasks_rude parameter to defer bucket table free Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-28 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] fprobe: Switch fprobe and BPF kprobe-multi to Tasks-Rude RCU Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2026-09-28 16:25 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] fprobe, rcu/tasks, rhashtable: " Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-28 23:28   ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2026-09-29  0:04     ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-29  0:33       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-09-29  0:41         ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-09-30  0:35           ` Masami Hiramatsu
2026-09-30  0:47             ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20260929082828.cd9844b5e632a23fd8308dbf@kernel.org \
    --to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=boqun@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=yonghong.song@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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®