From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Eranian Stephane <eranian@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 7/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix uncore_box ref/unref ordering
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 08:55:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c424e86-d410-46bd-9389-e71fdfe657d5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260611160033.66760-8-zide.chen@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Thanks.
On 6/12/2026 12:00 AM, Zide Chen wrote:
> In uncore_event_cpu_online(), uncore_box_ref() was called before
> uncore_change_context(). uncore_box_ref() gates on box->cpu >= 0,
> but box->cpu is still -1 at that point because uncore_change_context()
> has not run yet. As a result, the box is never initialized on the
> first CPU to come online in a die, leaving it permanently
> uninitialized in the single-CPU-per-die case.
>
> Thus, box->refcnt is one count below the true value, and in the CPU
> offline path, the box will be torn down on the second-to-last CPU.
>
> In uncore_event_cpu_offline(), uncore_box_unref() was called after
> uncore_change_context(), so box->cpu is already -1 when the collector
> CPU goes offline, which prevents it from tearing down the box.
>
> Fix by swapping the call order in both paths so that
> uncore_box_{ref,unref}() runs at the point where box->cpu reflects
> the correct context.
>
> Move allocate_boxes() out of uncore_box_ref() to enable this
> reordering.
>
> Fixes: c74443d92f68 ("perf/x86/uncore: Support per PMU cpumask")
> Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>
> ---
> v3:
> - Update changelog to mention moving allocate_boxes(). (Dapeng)
> - Update title; the bug is not limited to CPU hotplug.
> ---
> arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c
> index feb8c3b0076b..b9ac2f7d31ca 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c
> @@ -1580,9 +1580,15 @@ static int uncore_event_cpu_offline(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> int die, target;
>
> + /* Clear the references */
> + die = topology_logical_die_id(cpu);
> + uncore_box_unref(uncore_msr_uncores, die);
> + uncore_box_unref(uncore_mmio_uncores, die);
> +
> /* Check if exiting cpu is used for collecting uncore events */
> if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, &uncore_cpu_mask))
> - goto unref;
> + return 0;
> +
> /* Find a new cpu to collect uncore events */
> target = cpumask_any_but(topology_die_cpumask(cpu), cpu);
>
> @@ -1595,16 +1601,10 @@ static int uncore_event_cpu_offline(unsigned int cpu)
> uncore_change_context(uncore_msr_uncores, cpu, target);
> uncore_change_context(uncore_mmio_uncores, cpu, target);
> uncore_change_context(uncore_pci_uncores, cpu, target);
> -
> -unref:
> - /* Clear the references */
> - die = topology_logical_die_id(cpu);
> - uncore_box_unref(uncore_msr_uncores, die);
> - uncore_box_unref(uncore_mmio_uncores, die);
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int allocate_boxes(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> +static void allocate_boxes(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> unsigned int die, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> struct intel_uncore_box *box, *tmp;
> @@ -1621,8 +1621,10 @@ static int allocate_boxes(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> if (pmu->boxes[die] || uncore_pmu_broken(pmu))
> continue;
> box = uncore_alloc_box(type, cpu_to_node(cpu));
> - if (!box)
> + if (!box) {
> + uncore_pmu_set_broken(pmu);
> goto cleanup;
> + }
> box->pmu = pmu;
> box->dieid = die;
> list_add(&box->active_list, &allocated);
> @@ -1633,14 +1635,13 @@ static int allocate_boxes(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> list_del_init(&box->active_list);
> box->pmu->boxes[die] = box;
> }
> - return 0;
> + return;
>
> cleanup:
> list_for_each_entry_safe(box, tmp, &allocated, active_list) {
> list_del_init(&box->active_list);
> kfree(box);
> }
> - return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> static int uncore_box_ref(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> @@ -1649,11 +1650,7 @@ static int uncore_box_ref(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
> struct intel_uncore_type *type;
> struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu;
> struct intel_uncore_box *box;
> - int i, ret;
> -
> - ret = allocate_boxes(types, die, cpu);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + int i;
>
> for (; *types; types++) {
> type = *types;
> @@ -1669,27 +1666,26 @@ static int uncore_box_ref(struct intel_uncore_type **types,
>
> static int uncore_event_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> - int die, target, msr_ret, mmio_ret;
> + int die, target;
>
> die = topology_logical_die_id(cpu);
> - msr_ret = uncore_box_ref(uncore_msr_uncores, die, cpu);
> - mmio_ret = uncore_box_ref(uncore_mmio_uncores, die, cpu);
> + allocate_boxes(uncore_msr_uncores, die, cpu);
> + allocate_boxes(uncore_mmio_uncores, die, cpu);
>
> /*
> * Check if there is an online cpu in the package
> * which collects uncore events already.
> */
> target = cpumask_any_and(&uncore_cpu_mask, topology_die_cpumask(cpu));
> - if (target < nr_cpu_ids)
> - return 0;
> -
> - cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &uncore_cpu_mask);
> -
> - if (!msr_ret)
> + if (target >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &uncore_cpu_mask);
> uncore_change_context(uncore_msr_uncores, -1, cpu);
> - if (!mmio_ret)
> uncore_change_context(uncore_mmio_uncores, -1, cpu);
> - uncore_change_context(uncore_pci_uncores, -1, cpu);
> + uncore_change_context(uncore_pci_uncores, -1, cpu);
> + }
> +
> + uncore_box_ref(uncore_msr_uncores, die, cpu);
> + uncore_box_ref(uncore_mmio_uncores, die, cpu);
> return 0;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-12 0:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-11 16:00 [PATCH v3 0/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: PMU setup robustness fixes Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 1/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix PCI PMU cleanup on setup failure Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 2/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix refcnt and other cleanups Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-12 0:52 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 3/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Let init_box() callback report failures Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:38 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 4/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Keep PCI PMUs working when MMIO/MSR setup fails Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 5/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Factor out box setup code Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 6/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Introduce PMU flags and broken state Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-12 0:53 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 7/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix uncore_box ref/unref ordering Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-12 0:55 ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-06-11 16:00 ` [PATCH V3 8/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Implement lazy setup for MSR/MMIO PMUs Zide Chen
2026-06-11 16:33 ` 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=8c424e86-d410-46bd-9389-e71fdfe657d5@linux.intel.com \
--to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=zide.chen@intel.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