bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@linux.dev>
To: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
	namhyung@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
	irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
	kan.liang@linux.intel.com, song@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	eddyz87@gmail.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org,
	sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] bpf: Hold the perf callchain entry until used completely
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 15:08:30 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b031b85-83e6-4604-a25c-c54b32cd47ef@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <04002253-1edf-4957-a43e-bd6dcc465dcd@linux.dev>

在 2025/11/6 14:20, Yonghong Song 写道:
> 
> 
> On 11/5/25 9:12 PM, Tao Chen wrote:
>> 在 2025/11/6 06:16, Yonghong Song 写道:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/28/25 9:25 AM, Tao Chen wrote:
>>>> As Alexei noted, get_perf_callchain() return values may be reused
>>>> if a task is preempted after the BPF program enters migrate disable
>>>> mode. The perf_callchain_entres has a small stack of entries, and
>>>> we can reuse it as follows:
>>>>
>>>> 1. get the perf callchain entry
>>>> 2. BPF use...
>>>> 3. put the perf callchain entry
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@linux.dev>
>>>> ---
>>>>   kernel/bpf/stackmap.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
>>>> +---------
>>>>   1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>>>> index e28b35c7e0b..70d38249083 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>>>> @@ -188,13 +188,12 @@ static void 
>>>> stack_map_get_build_id_offset(struct bpf_stack_build_id *id_offs,
>>>>   }
>>>>   static struct perf_callchain_entry *
>>>> -get_callchain_entry_for_task(struct task_struct *task, u32 max_depth)
>>>> +get_callchain_entry_for_task(int *rctx, struct task_struct *task, 
>>>> u32 max_depth)
>>>>   {
>>>>   #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE
>>>>       struct perf_callchain_entry *entry;
>>>> -    int rctx;
>>>> -    entry = get_callchain_entry(&rctx);
>>>> +    entry = get_callchain_entry(rctx);
>>>>       if (!entry)
>>>>           return NULL;
>>>> @@ -216,8 +215,6 @@ get_callchain_entry_for_task(struct task_struct 
>>>> *task, u32 max_depth)
>>>>               to[i] = (u64)(from[i]);
>>>>       }
>>>> -    put_callchain_entry(rctx);
>>>> -
>>>>       return entry;
>>>>   #else /* CONFIG_STACKTRACE */
>>>>       return NULL;
>>>> @@ -297,6 +294,31 @@ static long __bpf_get_stackid(struct bpf_map *map,
>>>>       return id;
>>>>   }
>>>> +static struct perf_callchain_entry *
>>>> +bpf_get_perf_callchain(int *rctx, struct pt_regs *regs, bool 
>>>> kernel, bool user,
>>>> +               int max_stack, bool crosstask)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx ctx;
>>>> +    struct perf_callchain_entry *entry;
>>>> +
>>>> +    entry = get_callchain_entry(rctx);
>>>
>>> I think this may not work. Let us say we have two bpf programs
>>> both pinned to a particular cpu (migrate disabled but preempt enabled).
>>> get_callchain_entry() calls get_recursion_context() to get the
>>> buffer for a particulart level.
>>>
>>> static inline int get_recursion_context(u8 *recursion)
>>> {
>>>          unsigned char rctx = interrupt_context_level();
>>>          if (recursion[rctx])
>>>                  return -1;
>>>          recursion[rctx]++;
>>>          barrier();
>>>          return rctx;
>>> }
>>>
>>> It is possible that both tasks (at process level) may
>>> reach right before "recursion[rctx]++;".
>>> In such cases, both tasks will be able to get
>>> buffer and this is not right.
>>>
>>> To fix this, we either need to have preempt disable
>>> in bpf side, or maybe we have some kind of atomic
>>> operation (cmpxchg or similar things), or maybe
>>> has a preempt disable between if statement and recursion[rctx]++,
>>> so only one task can get buffer?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks to your reminder, can we add preempt disable before and after 
>> get_callchain_entry, avoid affecting the original functions of perf.
> 
> Yes, we get two get_callchain_entry() call site:
>    bpf/stackmap.c: entry = get_callchain_entry(&rctx);
>    events/callchain.c:     entry = get_callchain_entry(&rctx);
> We need to have preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() around them.
> 
> Another choice maybe adds preempt_disable/enable() for
> get_callchain_entry() and get_perf_callchain() in stackmap.c,
> assuming these two function usage in other places are for
> interrupts (softirq, hardirq and nmi) so they are okay.
> 
> But maybe the following is better?
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/events/internal.h b/kernel/events/internal.h
> index d9cc57083091..0ccf94315954 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/internal.h
> +++ b/kernel/events/internal.h
> @@ -214,12 +214,9 @@ static inline int get_recursion_context(u8 *recursion)
>   {
>          unsigned char rctx = interrupt_context_level();
> 
> -       if (recursion[rctx])
> +       if (cmpxchg(&recursion[rctx], 0, 1) != 0)
>                  return -1;
> 
> -       recursion[rctx]++;
> -       barrier();
> -
>          return rctx;
>   }
> 

Agree, this seems to have fewer side effects, thanks.

>>
>> Regarding multiple task preemption: if the entry is not released via 
>> put_callchain_entry, it appears that perf's buffer does not support 
>> recording the second task, so it returns directly here.
>>
>>           if (recursion[rctx])
>>                   return -1;
>>
>>>
>>>> +    if (unlikely(!entry))
>>>> +        return NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> +    __init_perf_callchain_ctx(&ctx, entry, max_stack, false);
>>>> +    if (kernel)
>>>> +        __get_perf_callchain_kernel(&ctx, regs);
>>>> +    if (user && !crosstask)
>>>> +        __get_perf_callchain_user(&ctx, regs);
>>>> +
>>>> +    return entry;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static void bpf_put_callchain_entry(int rctx)
>>>
>>> we have bpf_get_perf_callchain(), maybe rename the above
>>> to bpf_put_perf_callchain()?
>>>
>>
>> Ack, thanks.
>>
>>>> +{
>>>> +    put_callchain_entry(rctx);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Best Regards
Tao Chen

      reply	other threads:[~2025-11-06  7:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-28 16:25 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/2] Pass external callchain entry to get_perf_callchain Tao Chen
2025-10-28 16:25 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] perf: Refactor get_perf_callchain Tao Chen
2025-10-28 17:09   ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-30  2:36     ` Tao Chen
2025-11-05 20:45   ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-06  3:28     ` Tao Chen
2025-10-28 16:25 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] bpf: Hold the perf callchain entry until used completely Tao Chen
2025-11-05 22:16   ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-06  5:12     ` Tao Chen
2025-11-06  6:20       ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-06  7:08         ` Tao Chen [this message]

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=2b031b85-83e6-4604-a25c-c54b32cd47ef@linux.dev \
    --to=chen.dylane@linux.dev \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).