Skip to contentSkip to conversation

perf: Fix missing RCU reader protection in perf_event_clear_cpumask()

PATCH Applied [email protected] 3 participants 5 messages Sep 13, 2024 – Oct 25, 2024

Subsystems (2)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 perf: Fix missing RCU reader protection in perf_event_clear_cpumask()

From: Kan Liang <[email protected]>

Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.

[   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
[   32.607812] -----------------------------
[   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
[   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
[   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0

In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an obvious RCU read-side critical section.

Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list. In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.

---
 kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
kernel/events/core.c +1 -1
index 20e97c1aa4d6..5ba9934b49df 100644
@@ -13912,7 +13912,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
 	}
 
 	/* migrate */
-	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
 		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
 		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
 			continue;
Signature · 1 line
2.38.1
author
#1 lore raw
Quoted 22 lines · On 2024-09-13 12:23 p.m., [email protected] wrote:

From: Kan Liang <[email protected]>

Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.

[   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
[   32.607812] -----------------------------
[   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
[   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
[   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0

In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an obvious RCU read-side critical section.

Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list. In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.

Quoted 6 lines

Forgot to add the below tag, please fold it.

Thanks,
Kan

Quoted 18 lines
---
 kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
kernel/events/core.c +1 -1
index 20e97c1aa4d6..5ba9934b49df 100644
@@ -13912,7 +13912,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
 	}
 
 	/* migrate */
-	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
 		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
 		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
 			continue;
#2 lore raw
Quoted 32 lines · Kan
Quoted 22 lines · On 2024-09-13 12:23 p.m., [email protected] wrote:

From: Kan Liang <[email protected]>

Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.

[   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
[   32.607812] -----------------------------
[   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
[   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
[   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0

In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an obvious RCU read-side critical section.

Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list. In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Forgot to add the below tag, please fold it.

Have one of these to go along with it. ;-)

Quoted 20 lines

Thanks,
Kan

Quoted 18 lines
---
 kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
kernel/events/core.c +1 -1
index 20e97c1aa4d6..5ba9934b49df 100644
@@ -13912,7 +13912,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
 	}
 
 	/* migrate */
-	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
 		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
 		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
 			continue;
#3 lore raw
Quoted 33 lines · Paul E. McKenney
Quoted 32 lines · Kan
Quoted 28 lines · On 2024-09-13 12:23 p.m., [email protected] wrote:

From: Kan Liang <[email protected]>

Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.

[   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
[   32.607812] -----------------------------
[   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
[   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
[   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0

In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an obvious RCU read-side critical section.

Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list. In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Forgot to add the below tag, please fold it.

Have one of these to go along with it. ;-)

Just following up, seeing how this is not yet in -next.

Is this on its way upstream?

Thanx, Paul

Quoted 20 lines
Quoted 20 lines

Thanks,
Kan

Quoted 18 lines
---
 kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
kernel/events/core.c +1 -1
index 20e97c1aa4d6..5ba9934b49df 100644
@@ -13912,7 +13912,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
 	}
 
 	/* migrate */
-	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
 		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
 		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
 			continue;
merge bot Applied
#4 lore raw
In reply to [email protected]
The following commit has been merged into the perf/urgent branch of tip:

The following commit has been merged into the perf/urgent branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     e3dfd64c1f344ebec9397719244c27b360255855
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/e3dfd64c1f344ebec9397719244c27b360255855
Author:        Kan Liang <[email protected]>
AuthorDate:    Fri, 13 Sep 2024 09:23:40 -07:00
Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
CommitterDate: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 20:52:25 +02:00

perf: Fix missing RCU reader protection in perf_event_clear_cpumask()

Running rcutorture scenario TREE05, the below warning is triggered.

[   32.604594] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   32.605928] 6.11.0-rc5-00040-g4ba4f1afb6a9 #55238 Not tainted
[   32.607812] -----------------------------
[   32.609140] kernel/events/core.c:13946 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
[   32.611595] other info that might help us debug this:
[   32.614247] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   32.616392] 3 locks held by cpuhp/4/35:
[   32.617687]  #0: ffffffffb666a650 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.620563]  #1: ffffffffb666cd20 (cpuhp_state-down){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x4e/0x200
[   32.623412]  #2: ffffffffb677c288 (pmus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: perf_event_exit_cpu_context+0x32/0x2f0

In perf_event_clear_cpumask(), uses list_for_each_entry_rcu() without an obvious RCU read-side critical section.

Either pmus_srcu or pmus_lock is good enough to protect the pmus list. In the current context, pmus_lock is already held. The list_for_each_entry_rcu() is not required.

---
 kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
kernel/events/core.c +1 -1
index cdd0976..df27d08 100644
@@ -13959,7 +13959,7 @@ static void perf_event_clear_cpumask(unsigned int cpu)
 	}
 
 	/* migrate */
-	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry, lockdep_is_held(&pmus_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
 		if (pmu->scope == PERF_PMU_SCOPE_NONE ||
 		    WARN_ON_ONCE(pmu->scope >= PERF_PMU_MAX_SCOPE))
 			continue;