* [PATCH bpf-next 0/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH for perf links @ 2026-05-01 16:08 Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH " Florian Lehner 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf Cc: ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, martin.lau, eddyz87, memxor, song, yonghong.song, jolsa, shuah, davem, kuba, hawk, sdf, sun.jian.kdev, Florian Lehner 73b11c2a introduced LINK_DETACH and implemented it for some link types, like xdp, netns and others. This patch implements LINK_DETACH for perf links, re-using existing link release handling code. --- Change log: v3: 1. Introduce bpf_perf_link_mutex to guard against concurrent access v2: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260304210212.235096-1-dev@der-flo.net/ 1. Drop LINK_DETACH support for iter 2. Add test for LINK_DETACH for perf event links v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/aJOhPoTLdYnZmHYA@der-flo.net/ Florian Lehner (2): bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH for perf link kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++--- .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c | 79 ++++++++++++++--- 2 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link 2026-05-01 16:08 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH for perf links Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:09 ` Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:52 ` bot+bpf-ci 2026-05-01 16:59 ` sashiko-bot 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH " Florian Lehner 1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf Cc: ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, martin.lau, eddyz87, memxor, song, yonghong.song, jolsa, shuah, davem, kuba, hawk, sdf, sun.jian.kdev, Florian Lehner Implement the .detach operation for bpf_perf_link, allowing BPF_LINK_DETACH to release the perf event without destroying the link object. This mirrors the existing behavior for xdp and cgroup links. Introduce bpf_perf_link_mutext to guard perf_file against concurrent access from BPF_OBJ_GET_INFO_BY_FD and /proc fdinfo: the detach path NULLs out perf_file under the lock, while fill_link_info and show_fdinfo take a get_file() reference under the same lock before dereferencing it. Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net> --- kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c index 3b1f0ba02f61..efd759970e10 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c @@ -3880,13 +3880,35 @@ struct bpf_perf_link { struct file *perf_file; }; +/* Serializes bpf_perf_link_release() against bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info() + * and bpf_perf_link_show_fdinfo() to prevent a use-after-free on perf_file + * when BPF_LINK_DETACH races with BPF_OBJ_GET_INFO_BY_FD or /proc fdinfo. + */ +static DEFINE_MUTEX(bpf_perf_link_mutex); + static void bpf_perf_link_release(struct bpf_link *link) { struct bpf_perf_link *perf_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_perf_link, link); - struct perf_event *event = perf_link->perf_file->private_data; + struct perf_event *event; + struct file *perf_file; + + mutex_lock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + perf_file = perf_link->perf_file; + perf_link->perf_file = NULL; + mutex_unlock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + if (!perf_file) + return; + + event = perf_file->private_data; perf_event_free_bpf_prog(event); - fput(perf_link->perf_file); + fput(perf_file); +} + +static int bpf_perf_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link) +{ + bpf_perf_link_release(link); + return 0; } static void bpf_perf_link_dealloc(struct bpf_link *link) @@ -4095,22 +4117,42 @@ static int bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info(const struct bpf_link *link, { struct bpf_perf_link *perf_link; const struct perf_event *event; + struct file *perf_file; + int ret; perf_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_perf_link, link); - event = perf_get_event(perf_link->perf_file); - if (IS_ERR(event)) + + mutex_lock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + perf_file = perf_link->perf_file; + if (perf_file) + get_file(perf_file); + mutex_unlock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + + if (!perf_file) + return 0; + + event = perf_get_event(perf_file); + if (IS_ERR(event)) { + fput(perf_file); return PTR_ERR(event); + } switch (event->prog->type) { case BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT: - return bpf_perf_link_fill_perf_event(event, info); + ret = bpf_perf_link_fill_perf_event(event, info); + break; case BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT: - return bpf_perf_link_fill_tracepoint(event, info); + ret = bpf_perf_link_fill_tracepoint(event, info); + break; case BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE: - return bpf_perf_link_fill_probe(event, info); + ret = bpf_perf_link_fill_probe(event, info); + break; default: - return -EOPNOTSUPP; + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP; } + + fput(perf_file); + return ret; } static void bpf_perf_event_link_show_fdinfo(const struct perf_event *event, @@ -4163,26 +4205,43 @@ static void bpf_perf_link_show_fdinfo(const struct bpf_link *link, { struct bpf_perf_link *perf_link; const struct perf_event *event; + struct file *perf_file; perf_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_perf_link, link); - event = perf_get_event(perf_link->perf_file); - if (IS_ERR(event)) + + mutex_lock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + perf_file = perf_link->perf_file; + if (perf_file) + get_file(perf_file); + mutex_unlock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); + + if (!perf_file) return; + event = perf_get_event(perf_file); + if (IS_ERR(event)) + goto out; + switch (event->prog->type) { case BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT: - return bpf_perf_event_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + bpf_perf_event_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + break; case BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT: - return bpf_tracepoint_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + bpf_tracepoint_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + break; case BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE: - return bpf_probe_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + bpf_probe_link_show_fdinfo(event, seq); + break; default: - return; + break; } +out: + fput(perf_file); } static const struct bpf_link_ops bpf_perf_link_lops = { .release = bpf_perf_link_release, + .detach = bpf_perf_link_detach, .dealloc = bpf_perf_link_dealloc, .fill_link_info = bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info, .show_fdinfo = bpf_perf_link_show_fdinfo, -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:52 ` bot+bpf-ci 2026-05-01 16:59 ` sashiko-bot 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: bot+bpf-ci @ 2026-05-01 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev, bpf Cc: ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, martin.lau, eddyz87, memxor, song, yonghong.song, jolsa, shuah, davem, kuba, hawk, sdf, sun.jian.kdev, dev, ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, yonghong.song, clm, ihor.solodrai [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1957 bytes --] > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > index 3b1f0ba02f61..efd759970e10 100644 > --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > @@ -3880,13 +3880,35 @@ struct bpf_perf_link { > struct file *perf_file; > }; > > +/* Serializes bpf_perf_link_release() against bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info() > + * and bpf_perf_link_show_fdinfo() to prevent a use-after-free on perf_file > + * when BPF_LINK_DETACH races with BPF_OBJ_GET_INFO_BY_FD or /proc fdinfo. > + */ > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(bpf_perf_link_mutex); Should this commit include a Fixes tag? The use-after-free race condition being fixed appears to have been introduced in commit 1b715e1b0ec5 ("bpf: Support ->fill_link_info for perf_event"), which added bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info() and bpf_perf_link_show_fdinfo() that access perf_link->perf_file without synchronization, creating a race with bpf_perf_link_release(). Suggested: Fixes: 1b715e1b0ec5 ("bpf: Support ->fill_link_info for perf_event") > > static void bpf_perf_link_release(struct bpf_link *link) > { > struct bpf_perf_link *perf_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_perf_link, link); > - struct perf_event *event = perf_link->perf_file->private_data; > + struct perf_event *event; > + struct file *perf_file; > + > + mutex_lock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); > + perf_file = perf_link->perf_file; > + perf_link->perf_file = NULL; > + mutex_unlock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); > > + if (!perf_file) > + return; > + > + event = perf_file->private_data; > perf_event_free_bpf_prog(event); > - fput(perf_link->perf_file); > + fput(perf_file); > +} > + > +static int bpf_perf_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link) > +{ > + bpf_perf_link_release(link); > + return 0; > } [ ... ] --- AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug. See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/25222566755 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:52 ` bot+bpf-ci @ 2026-05-01 16:59 ` sashiko-bot 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-05-01 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Lehner; +Cc: bpf Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [High] Concurrent execution of BPF_LINK_DETACH and BPF_OBJ_GET_INFO_BY_FD (or /proc/pid/fdinfo reads) causes a NULL pointer dereference on event->prog. -- commit 738bb49794369ff2bcc7c3d461300bd57e714cf5 Author: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net> bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link This commit implements the .detach operation for bpf_perf_link, allowing BPF_LINK_DETACH to release the perf event without destroying the link object. > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c [ ... ] > @@ -4095,22 +4117,42 @@ static int bpf_perf_link_fill_link_info(const struct bpf_link *link, > { > struct bpf_perf_link *perf_link; > const struct perf_event *event; > + struct file *perf_file; > + int ret; > > perf_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_perf_link, link); > - event = perf_get_event(perf_link->perf_file); > - if (IS_ERR(event)) > + > + mutex_lock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); > + perf_file = perf_link->perf_file; > + if (perf_file) > + get_file(perf_file); > + mutex_unlock(&bpf_perf_link_mutex); > + > + if (!perf_file) > + return 0; > + > + event = perf_get_event(perf_file); > + if (IS_ERR(event)) { > + fput(perf_file); > return PTR_ERR(event); > + } > > switch (event->prog->type) { Can this result in a NULL pointer dereference on event->prog? If a concurrent BPF_LINK_DETACH triggers bpf_perf_link_release(), it sets perf_link->perf_file = NULL under the mutex, drops the mutex, and then calls perf_event_free_bpf_prog(event). If perf_event_free_bpf_prog() clears event->prog right after we drop the mutex here but before we evaluate the switch statement, evaluating event->prog->type could panic. Would it be safer to use link->prog->type instead? The program reference in link->prog is pinned for the lifetime of the link object. -- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260501160901.224134-1-dev@der-flo.net?part=1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH for perf link 2026-05-01 16:08 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH for perf links Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:09 ` Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 17:11 ` sashiko-bot 2026-05-03 13:14 ` Jiri Olsa 1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bpf Cc: ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, martin.lau, eddyz87, memxor, song, yonghong.song, jolsa, shuah, davem, kuba, hawk, sdf, sun.jian.kdev, Florian Lehner Add test_perf_link_detach() to verify that the new LINK_DETACH support for BPF perf links works correctly. The test creates a link to a BPF program for a software perf event, confirms the program is executed, calls bpf_link_detach() to exercise the BPF_LINK_DETACH syscall path, and then verifies the program is no longer invoked after detach. Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net> --- .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c index 9e3a0d217af8..b75112c1b67d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c @@ -18,29 +18,84 @@ static void burn_cpu(void) barrier(); } -void test_perf_link(void) +static int perf_link_setup(struct test_perf_link **skel, int *pfd) { - struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; struct perf_event_attr attr; - int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; - int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; - struct bpf_link_info info; - __u32 info_len = sizeof(info); - __u64 timeout_time_ns; - /* create perf event */ memset(&attr, 0, sizeof(attr)); attr.size = sizeof(attr); attr.type = PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE; attr.config = PERF_COUNT_SW_CPU_CLOCK; attr.freq = 1; attr.sample_freq = 1000; - pfd = syscall(__NR_perf_event_open, &attr, 0, -1, -1, PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC); - if (!ASSERT_GE(pfd, 0, "perf_fd")) + *pfd = syscall(__NR_perf_event_open, &attr, 0, -1, -1, PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC); + if (!ASSERT_GE(*pfd, 0, "perf_fd")) + return -1; + + *skel = test_perf_link__open_and_load(); + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(*skel, "skel_load")) + return -1; + + return 0; +} + +void test_perf_link_detach(void) +{ + struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; + int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; + int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; + __u64 timeout_time_ns; + + if (perf_link_setup(&skel, &pfd)) + goto cleanup; + + link_fd = bpf_link_create(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.handler), pfd, + BPF_PERF_EVENT, NULL); + if (!ASSERT_GE(link_fd, 0, "link_fd")) goto cleanup; - skel = test_perf_link__open_and_load(); - if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "skel_load")) + /* ensure we get at least one perf_event prog execution */ + timeout_time_ns = get_time_ns() + BURN_TIMEOUT_NS; + while (true) { + burn_cpu(); + if (skel->bss->run_cnt > 0) + break; + if (!ASSERT_LT(get_time_ns(), timeout_time_ns, "run_cnt_timeout")) + goto cleanup; + } + + /* detach via BPF_LINK_DETACH - BPF program should no longer be executed */ + err = bpf_link_detach(link_fd); + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "link_detach")) + goto cleanup; + + /* make sure there are no stragglers */ + kern_sync_rcu(); + + run_cnt_before = skel->bss->run_cnt; + burn_cpu(); + run_cnt_after = skel->bss->run_cnt; + + ASSERT_EQ(run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after, "run_cnt_detached"); + +cleanup: + if (link_fd >= 0) + close(link_fd); + if (pfd >= 0) + close(pfd); + test_perf_link__destroy(skel); +} + +void test_perf_link(void) +{ + struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; + int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; + int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; + struct bpf_link_info info; + __u32 info_len = sizeof(info); + __u64 timeout_time_ns; + + if (perf_link_setup(&skel, &pfd)) goto cleanup; link_fd = bpf_link_create(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.handler), pfd, -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH for perf link 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH " Florian Lehner @ 2026-05-01 17:11 ` sashiko-bot 2026-05-03 13:14 ` Jiri Olsa 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-05-01 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Lehner; +Cc: bpf Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] The `test_perf_link_detach` test verification is brittle and likely to falsely pass, as a single call to `burn_cpu()` is too short to guarantee a perf event tick. -- commit 80a1776d4374467cf1d037c1e22a1252e27c885c Author: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net> selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH for perf link This commit adds a new test, test_perf_link_detach(), to verify the BPF_LINK_DETACH syscall path for software perf events. It creates a link, verifies execution, detaches it, and checks that the program is no longer invoked. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c > index 9e3a0d217af8..b75112c1b67d 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c [ ... ] > +void test_perf_link_detach(void) > +{ > + struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; > + int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; > + int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; > + __u64 timeout_time_ns; [ ... ] > + /* detach via BPF_LINK_DETACH - BPF program should no longer be executed */ > + err = bpf_link_detach(link_fd); > + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "link_detach")) > + goto cleanup; > + > + /* make sure there are no stragglers */ > + kern_sync_rcu(); > + > + run_cnt_before = skel->bss->run_cnt; > + burn_cpu(); > + run_cnt_after = skel->bss->run_cnt; > + > + ASSERT_EQ(run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after, "run_cnt_detached"); Is a single call to burn_cpu() sufficient to guarantee a perf event tick here? The software CPU clock perf event is configured in perf_link_setup() to sample at 1000 Hz, meaning it triggers approximately once every 1 millisecond of CPU time. The burn_cpu() function executes a fixed loop of 1,000,000 iterations. On modern CPUs, this loop often takes significantly less than 1 millisecond to complete. Because a single burn_cpu() invocation takes less than the 1ms interval, is it possible that no timer interrupt occurs during this window? If so, run_cnt_after would equal run_cnt_before even if the detach operation failed and the program was still attached, causing the test to falsely pass. Could this be changed to use a time-based loop (similar to the initial execution check) for several milliseconds to ensure correctness? [ ... ] -- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260501160901.224134-1-dev@der-flo.net?part=2 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH for perf link 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH " Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 17:11 ` sashiko-bot @ 2026-05-03 13:14 ` Jiri Olsa 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jiri Olsa @ 2026-05-03 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Lehner Cc: bpf, ast, daniel, john.fastabend, andrii, martin.lau, eddyz87, memxor, song, yonghong.song, shuah, davem, kuba, hawk, sdf, sun.jian.kdev On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 06:09:01PM +0200, Florian Lehner wrote: > Add test_perf_link_detach() to verify that the new LINK_DETACH support for > BPF perf links works correctly. The test creates a link to a BPF program > for a software perf event, confirms the program is executed, calls > bpf_link_detach() to exercise the BPF_LINK_DETACH syscall path, and then > verifies the program is no longer invoked after detach. > > Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net> hi, you mentioned in here [1] the primary use case is to disable uprobes temporarily.. I was expecting this as a selftest and curious to see how that works.. could you add selftest for that? thanks, jirka [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/aJOhPoTLdYnZmHYA@der-flo.net/ > --- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c > index 9e3a0d217af8..b75112c1b67d 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_link.c > @@ -18,29 +18,84 @@ static void burn_cpu(void) > barrier(); > } > > -void test_perf_link(void) > +static int perf_link_setup(struct test_perf_link **skel, int *pfd) > { > - struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; > struct perf_event_attr attr; > - int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; > - int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; > - struct bpf_link_info info; > - __u32 info_len = sizeof(info); > - __u64 timeout_time_ns; > > - /* create perf event */ > memset(&attr, 0, sizeof(attr)); > attr.size = sizeof(attr); > attr.type = PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE; > attr.config = PERF_COUNT_SW_CPU_CLOCK; > attr.freq = 1; > attr.sample_freq = 1000; > - pfd = syscall(__NR_perf_event_open, &attr, 0, -1, -1, PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC); > - if (!ASSERT_GE(pfd, 0, "perf_fd")) > + *pfd = syscall(__NR_perf_event_open, &attr, 0, -1, -1, PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC); > + if (!ASSERT_GE(*pfd, 0, "perf_fd")) > + return -1; > + > + *skel = test_perf_link__open_and_load(); > + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(*skel, "skel_load")) > + return -1; > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +void test_perf_link_detach(void) > +{ > + struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; > + int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; > + int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; > + __u64 timeout_time_ns; > + > + if (perf_link_setup(&skel, &pfd)) > + goto cleanup; > + > + link_fd = bpf_link_create(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.handler), pfd, > + BPF_PERF_EVENT, NULL); > + if (!ASSERT_GE(link_fd, 0, "link_fd")) > goto cleanup; > > - skel = test_perf_link__open_and_load(); > - if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "skel_load")) > + /* ensure we get at least one perf_event prog execution */ > + timeout_time_ns = get_time_ns() + BURN_TIMEOUT_NS; > + while (true) { > + burn_cpu(); > + if (skel->bss->run_cnt > 0) > + break; > + if (!ASSERT_LT(get_time_ns(), timeout_time_ns, "run_cnt_timeout")) > + goto cleanup; > + } > + > + /* detach via BPF_LINK_DETACH - BPF program should no longer be executed */ > + err = bpf_link_detach(link_fd); > + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "link_detach")) > + goto cleanup; > + > + /* make sure there are no stragglers */ > + kern_sync_rcu(); > + > + run_cnt_before = skel->bss->run_cnt; > + burn_cpu(); > + run_cnt_after = skel->bss->run_cnt; > + > + ASSERT_EQ(run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after, "run_cnt_detached"); > + > +cleanup: > + if (link_fd >= 0) > + close(link_fd); > + if (pfd >= 0) > + close(pfd); > + test_perf_link__destroy(skel); > +} > + > +void test_perf_link(void) > +{ > + struct test_perf_link *skel = NULL; > + int pfd = -1, link_fd = -1, err; > + int run_cnt_before, run_cnt_after; > + struct bpf_link_info info; > + __u32 info_len = sizeof(info); > + __u64 timeout_time_ns; > + > + if (perf_link_setup(&skel, &pfd)) > goto cleanup; > > link_fd = bpf_link_create(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.handler), pfd, > -- > 2.53.0 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-03 13:14 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-05-01 16:08 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH for perf links Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2 v3] bpf: Add LINK_DETACH support for perf link Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 16:52 ` bot+bpf-ci 2026-05-01 16:59 ` sashiko-bot 2026-05-01 16:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2 v3] selftests/bpf: Test LINK_DETACH " Florian Lehner 2026-05-01 17:11 ` sashiko-bot 2026-05-03 13:14 ` Jiri Olsa
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox