linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, mingo@kernel.org,
	acme@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org, leo.yan@arm.com,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
	kan.liang@linux.intel.com
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	David Wang <00107082@163.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf/core: fix dangling cgroup pointer in cpuctx
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 07:39:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aD6YpfGz3MUfedHC@e129823.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aD6Xk2rdBjnVy6DA@e129823.arm.com>

> > > attach_state doesn't related for event->state change.
> > > if one event already cleared PERF_ATTACH_CONTEXT, that event is called
> > > via list_del_event()
> >
> > Maybe this concern could be clarified, what about other subtle impacts.
> > The change should be thorough reviewed, if you want to push it further.
> >
> > It takes me more than a month to figure out a procedure to reproduce the kernel panic bug,
> > It is  just very hard to capture a bug happens in rare situation.
> >
> > And your patch has a global impact, it changes behavior unnecessarily.
>
> TBH, this patch just change of time of "event->state" while doing,
> As my bad miss the disable cgorup perf.
> I think there seems no other side effect for chaning state while in
> removing event.
> But, Let's wait for other people's review.
>
> > >
> > > Also, your patch couldn't solve a problem describe in
> > > commit a3c3c6667("perf/core: Fix child_total_time_enabled accounting bug at task exit")
> > > for INCATIVE event's total_enable_time.
> >
> > I do not think so.
> > Correct me if I am making silly  mistakes,
> > The patch, https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250603032651.3988-1-00107082@163.com/
> > calls perf_event_set_state() based on DETACH_EXIT flag, which cover the INACTIVE state, right?
> > If DETACH_EXIT is not used for this purpose? Then why should it exist at the first place?
> > I think I does not revert the purpose of commit a3c3c6667.....But I could be wrong
> > Would you show a call path where DETACH_EXIT is not set, but the changes in commit a3c3c6667 is still needed?
>
> Sorry for my bad explaination without detail.
> Think about cpu specific event and closed by task.
> If there is specific child cpu event specified in cpu 0.
>   1. cpu 0 -> active
>   2. scheulded to cpu1 -> inactive
>   3. close the cpu event from parent -> inactive close
>
> Can be failed to count total_enable_time.
>
> Thanks.

And also, considering the your patch, for DETACH_EXIT case,
If it changes the state before list_del_event() that wouldn't disable
related to the cgroup. So it would make cpuctx->cgrp pointer could be dangled
as patch describe...

> --
> Sincerely,
> Yeoreum Yun

--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-03  6:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-02 18:40 [PATCH 1/1] perf/core: fix dangling cgroup pointer in cpuctx Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03  2:01 ` David Wang
2025-06-03  4:46   ` [PATCH " Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03  5:44     ` David Wang
2025-06-03  6:34       ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03  6:39         ` Yeoreum Yun [this message]
2025-06-03  6:47           ` David Wang
2025-06-03  6:42         ` David Wang
2025-06-03  7:16           ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03  7:31             ` David Wang
2025-06-03  8:15             ` David Wang
2025-06-03  6:54         ` David Wang
2025-06-03  9:20         ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03 10:08           ` David Wang
2025-06-03 13:41             ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-03 14:02               ` David Wang
2025-06-03 14:00 ` Leo Yan
2025-06-03 14:44   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-03 15:17     ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-04  7:06       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04  8:03     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04 10:06       ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-04 12:37         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04 12:54           ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-06-04 10:18       ` Leo Yan
2025-06-04 13:58         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04 15:17           ` Leo Yan
2025-06-04 14:16         ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-04 15:46           ` Leo Yan
2025-06-04 15:59             ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-05 11:29             ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-05 12:33               ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-05 17:21                 ` Leo Yan
2025-06-05 11:41           ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-03 15:05   ` Yeoreum Yun

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=aD6YpfGz3MUfedHC@e129823.arm.com \
    --to=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
    --cc=00107082@163.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=leo.yan@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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).