From: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4] tracing: Fix race between update_event_fields and, event_define_fields
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 17:40:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6c515e5f-66f4-0dc7-00f2-69f319c8ad87@allwinnertech.com> (raw)
event_define_fields() (pri=1 MODULE_STATE_COMING notifier, locked by
event_mutex) populates class->fields via list_add(), while
update_event_fields() (called from the pri=0 notifier path via
trace_event_update_all) traverses class->fields protected only by
trace_event_sem. These are two different locks guarding the same
data structure, so during cross-module loading a reader on one CPU can
observe partially initialized list nodes being concurrently added by a
writer on another CPU.
On arm64 with weak memory ordering, __list_add() writes to two
different cache lines:
next->prev = new; // (1) ordinary store
new->next = next; // (2) ordinary store
new->prev = prev; // (3) ordinary store
WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new); // (4) release store
The store buffer can drain (2) and (4) independently since they target
different cache lines. A remote CPU may observe (4) before (2): it
sees prev->next pointing to the new node, but the new node's link.next
is still zero (kmem_cache_alloc zero-initialized via KMEM_CACHE with
SLAB_PANIC). Since offsetof(struct ftrace_event_field, link) == 0,
list_for_each_entry() derives field == NULL from link.next == 0 and
crashes at field->type (offset 0x18):
Unable to handle kernel access ... at virtual address 0000000000000018
pc : update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
Call trace:
update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
trace_event_update_all+0x7c/0x2b4
trace_module_notify+0x4c/0x1dc
notifier_call_chain+0x84/0x168
blocking_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x64/0xd4
load_module+0x10c8/0x123c
__arm64_sys_finit_module+0x230/0x31c
Fix by holding event_mutex in trace_event_update_all() before
down_write(&trace_event_sem). This serializes the reader against
event_define_fields() which takes event_mutex for the entire
write-side critical section. The lock ordering event_mutex ->
trace_event_sem is already established at three other sites
(trace_remove_event_call, event_trace_add_tracer,
event_trace_del_tracer), so this introduces no ordering conflict.
An alternative of placing mutex_lock inside update_event_fields() was
considered but rejected -- it would invert the established lock
ordering (trace_event_sem -> event_mutex) and risk ABBA deadlock.
Fixes: b3bc8547d3be ("tracing: Have TRACE_DEFINE_ENUM affect trace event types as well")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
---
kernel/trace/trace_events.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
index 956692856fa8..9632788da5af 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
@@ -3566,6 +3566,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map **map, int len)
int last_i;
int i;
+ mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
down_write(&trace_event_sem);
list_for_each_entry_safe(call, p, &ftrace_events, list) {
/* events are usually grouped together with systems */
@@ -3604,6 +3605,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map **map, int len)
cond_resched();
}
up_write(&trace_event_sem);
+ mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
}
static bool event_in_systems(struct trace_event_call *call,
--
2.29.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-03 9:40 Michael Wu [this message]
2026-08-03 22:49 ` [PATCH v4] tracing: Fix race between update_event_fields and, event_define_fields Masami Hiramatsu
2026-08-09 2:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-10 6:51 ` Michael Wu
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=6c515e5f-66f4-0dc7-00f2-69f319c8ad87@allwinnertech.com \
--to=michael@allwinnertech.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.