Linux Perf Users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/9] perf mutex: Add DO_ONCE() for one-time initialization
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 09:13:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261002091311.6F81E1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261001185400.2754753-5-acme@kernel.org>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] perf: data race and missing memory barriers in DO_ONCE()
--

commit 29753096ef417d4625af9a405f85df097ba45c30
Author: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
perf mutex: Add DO_ONCE() for one-time initialization

This commit introduces a DO_ONCE() macro for lazy initialization across
multiple threads in perf user-space. It mirrors the kernel's DO_ONCE()
behavior using a statically initialized mutex and a boolean flag.

> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/mutex.h b/tools/perf/util/mutex.h
> index b85a80ad60386..87937970615ff 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/mutex.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/mutex.h
[ ... ]
> +/*
> + * Runs fn() exactly once however many threads race to it, the rest wait
> + * for it to finish; per call site state, so multiple sites wanting the
> + * same once use a common helper, as in the kernel's DO_ONCE().
> + */
> +#define DO_ONCE(fn, ...)						       \
> +	({								       \
> +		static bool ___done;					       \
> +		static DEFINE_MUTEX(___once_lock);			       \
> +		bool ___ret = false;					       \
> +									       \
> +		if (!___done) {						       \

[Severity: Medium]
Is an acquire memory barrier needed here? On weakly-ordered architectures,
a racing thread evaluating this lockless fast-path without an acquire
barrier (such as smp_load_acquire) could observe ___done as true while
reading stale data from fn()'s side effects. This plain read also
constitutes a data race that could trigger ThreadSanitizer warnings.

> +			mutex_lock(&___once_lock);			       \
> +			if (!___done) {					       \
> +				fn(__VA_ARGS__);			       \
> +				___done = true;				       \

[Severity: Medium]
Could the CPU or compiler reorder this plain store before the initialization
side effects of fn() are globally visible? A store-release barrier
(such as smp_store_release) might be necessary here so that threads on the
lockless fast-path do not access uninitialized data on architectures like
ARM64 or PowerPC.

> +				___ret = true;				       \
> +			}						       \
> +			mutex_unlock(&___once_lock);			       \
> +		}							       \
> +		___ret;							       \
> +	})

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261001185400.2754753-1-acme@kernel.org?part=4

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-02  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-01 18:53 [PATCH v7 0/9] perf tools: Add progress diagnostics and a false-sharing workload Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 1/9] perf config: Move perf_config__set_variable() to util/config.c Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 2/9] perf config: Make perf_etc_perfconfig() never return NULL Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 3/9] perf mutex: Add DEFINE_MUTEX() static initializer Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 4/9] perf mutex: Add DO_ONCE() for one-time initialization Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 5/9] perf config: Serialize config file access with a mutex Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 6/9] perf report: Add --progress option Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 7/9] perf report: Add --no-progress option Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:53 ` [PATCH v7 8/9] perf scripts: Add perf-stuck, to tell where a running perf is stuck Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-01 18:54 ` [PATCH v7 9/9] perf test: Add false_sharing workload exhibiting cross-CPU false sharing Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-10-02  9:13   ` sashiko-bot

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=20261002091311.6F81E1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.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