From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Mohamed Ayman <mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@arm.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/CORESIGHT FRAMEWORK AND DRIVERS"
<coresight@lists.linaro.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/CORESIGHT FRAMEWORK AND DRIVERS"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:Real-time Linux (PREEMPT_RT):Keyword:PREEMPT_RT"
<linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_put_percpu_source_ref()
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 12:42:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260714104252.NuPnAQyJ@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260713230028.8046-1-mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
On 2026-07-14 02:00:27 [+0300], Mohamed Ayman wrote:
> Dropping the last reference to a coresight_device triggers a kernel panic
> on PREEMPT_RT builds due to a "scheduling while atomic" violation.
>
> During CPU idle transitions, coresight_cpu_pm_notify() runs with
> interrupts disabled. It eventually calls put_device(), which can
> synchronously trigger the device's release callback and drop the parent
> device's reference. On PREEMPT_RT, free_percpu() takes a sleeping lock
> (rt-mutex), and the parent's release callback might also sleep. Sleeping
It is a spinlock_t which we refer as a sleeping lock. There is "struct
rt_mutex" which is somehow different.
I would suggest to word it like "uses a spinlock_t for locking which
becomes a sleeping lock on PREEMPT_RT".
> in this atomic PM context crashes the system.
>
> A previous patch tried deferring just the coresight_device_release() body,
> but this still left the synchronous put_device() call dangerously exposed
> to sleeping parent release functions.
>
> Fix this by entirely deferring the put_device() call to process context.
> We add a pending counter (put_pending) and a work_struct to the coresight
> device. When releasing a reference, we increment the counter and queue
> the work. A worker thread then safely drains the counter and calls
> put_device(). The counter prevents leaking references if multiple puts
> are queued before the worker even has a chance to run.
>
> To prevent a use-after-free race condition during module unload, the work
> is queued on a dedicated coresight_wq which is safely drained and
> destroyed in coresight_exit().
Do you have anything that keeps the module-ref counter up with each new
device?
> Finally, remove the unnecessary raw_spinlock_irqsave in the put path,
> as dropping a reference doesn't require protecting the per-CPU table.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mohamed Ayman <mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com>
> ---
…
> @@ -163,16 +175,9 @@ void coresight_put_percpu_source_ref(struct coresight_device *csdev)
> if (!csdev || !coresight_is_percpu_source(csdev))
> return;
>
> - guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&coresight_dev_lock);
> + atomic_inc(&csdev->put_pending);
>
> - /*
> - * TODO: coresight_device_release() is invoked to release resources when
> - * the device's refcount reaches zero. It then calls free_percpu(),
> - * which acquires pcpu_lock — a sleepable lock when PREEMPT_RT is
> - * enabled. Since the raw spinlock coresight_dev_lock is held, this can
> - * lead to a potential "scheduling while atomic" issue.
> - */
> - put_device(&csdev->dev);
> + queue_work(coresight_wq, &csdev->put_work);
What about you keep this as-is and just delay coresight_device_release()
instead?
> }
>
> struct coresight_device *coresight_get_source(struct coresight_path *path)
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-14 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-12 21:04 [PATCH] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_device_release() Mohamed Ayman
2026-07-13 3:07 ` Jie Gan
2026-07-13 23:00 ` [PATCH v2] coresight: Fix scheduling while atomic in coresight_put_percpu_source_ref() Mohamed Ayman
2026-07-14 10:42 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-07-14 19:42 ` MOHAMED AYMAN
2026-07-15 6:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-16 3:07 ` MOHAMED AYMAN
2026-07-16 12:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20260714104252.NuPnAQyJ@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=leo.yan@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mike.leach@arm.com \
--cc=mohamedaymanworkspace@gmail.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
/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