mirror of
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux.git
synced 2025-12-28 13:02:59 +00:00
e6654d9a4d
[ Upstream commit3172fb9866] 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); [peterz: use guard instead of goto unlock] Fixes:db4a835601("perf/core: Set cgroup in CPU contexts for new cgroup events") Signed-off-by: Luo Gengkun <luogengkun@huaweicloud.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250604033924.3914647-3-luogengkun@huaweicloud.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>