From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, acme@kernel.org,
mingo@redhat.com, jolsa@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
namhyung@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, glider@google.com,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, arnd@arndb.de, christian@brauner.io,
dvyukov@google.com, jannh@google.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
mascasa@google.com, pcc@google.com, irogers@google.com,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 8/8] selftests/perf: Add kselftest for remove_on_exec
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 11:32:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFnDo7dczjDzLP68@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YFm6aakSRlF2nWtu@elver.google.com>
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 10:52:41AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> with efs->func==__perf_event_enable. I believe it's sufficient to add
>
> mutex_lock(&parent_event->child_mutex);
> list_del_init(&event->child_list);
> mutex_unlock(&parent_event->child_mutex);
>
> right before removing from context. With the version I have now (below
> for completeness), extended torture with the above test results in no
> more warnings and the test also passes.
>
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(event, next, &ctx->event_list, event_entry) {
> + struct perf_event *parent_event = event->parent;
> +
> + if (!event->attr.remove_on_exec)
> continue;
>
> + if (!is_kernel_event(event))
> + perf_remove_from_owner(event);
>
> + modified = true;
> +
> + if (parent_event) {
> /*
> + * Remove event from parent, to avoid race where the
> + * parent concurrently iterates through its children to
> + * enable, disable, or otherwise modify an event.
> */
> + mutex_lock(&parent_event->child_mutex);
> + list_del_init(&event->child_list);
> + mutex_unlock(&parent_event->child_mutex);
> }
^^^ this, right?
But that's something perf_event_exit_event() alread does. So then you're
worried about the order of things.
> +
> + perf_remove_from_context(event, !!event->parent * DETACH_GROUP);
> + perf_event_exit_event(event, ctx, current, true);
> }
perf_event_release_kernel() first does perf_remove_from_context() and
then clears the child_list, and that makes sense because if we're there,
there's no external access anymore, the filedesc is gone and nobody will
be iterating child_list anymore.
perf_event_exit_task_context() and perf_event_exit_event() OTOH seem to
rely on ctx->task == TOMBSTONE to sabotage event_function_call() such
that if anybody is iterating the child_list, it'll NOP out.
But here we don't have neither, and thus need to worry about the order
vs child_list iteration.
I suppose we should stick sync_child_event() in there as well.
And at that point there's very little value in still using
perf_event_exit_event()... let me see if there's something to be done
about that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-23 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-10 10:41 [PATCH RFC v2 0/8] Add support for synchronous signals on perf events Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/8] perf/core: Apply PERF_EVENT_IOC_MODIFY_ATTRIBUTES to children Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/8] perf/core: Support only inheriting events if cloned with CLONE_THREAD Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/8] perf/core: Add support for event removal on exec Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:47 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-16 16:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-22 9:20 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/8] signal: Introduce TRAP_PERF si_code and si_perf to siginfo Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 5/8] perf/core: Add support for SIGTRAP on perf events Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 6/8] perf/core: Add breakpoint information to siginfo on SIGTRAP Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 7/8] selftests/perf: Add kselftest for process-wide sigtrap handling Marco Elver
2021-03-10 10:41 ` [PATCH RFC v2 8/8] selftests/perf: Add kselftest for remove_on_exec Marco Elver
2021-03-22 13:24 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-22 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-23 9:52 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-23 10:32 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-03-23 10:41 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-23 12:08 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-23 14:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-23 15:58 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-23 16:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-23 3:10 ` Ian Rogers
2021-03-23 9:47 ` Marco Elver
2021-03-23 19:16 ` Marco Elver
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=YFnDo7dczjDzLP68@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mascasa@google.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 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).