From: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] tracing: Fix race between update_event_fields and event_define_fields
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:13:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08216429-43ba-efc2-f6b1-459210d07b02@allwinnertech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9613182c-6299-3c68-5afb-2bf8d9f90f03@allwinnertech.com>
Hi Masami,
Thanks for the review. I've rebased the patch. The new version is below.
---
From ec00b31c58b56f4cbbe6dd67c9f88a1d87d8d5ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 17:34:09 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v2] tracing: Fix race between update_event_fields and
event_define_fields
event_define_fields() (pri=1 MODULE_STATE_COMING notifier, locked by
event_mutex) populates class->fields via list_add(), while
update_event_fields() (called from the pri=0 notifier path via
trace_event_update_all) traverses class->fields protected only by
trace_event_sem. These are two different locks guarding the same
data structure, so during cross-module loading a reader on one CPU can
observe partially initialized list nodes being concurrently added by a
writer on another CPU.
On arm64 with weak memory ordering, __list_add() writes to two
different cache lines:
next->prev = new; // (1) ordinary store
new->next = next; // (2) ordinary store —
field's cache line
new->prev = prev; // (3) ordinary store
WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new); // (4) release store — head's
cache line
The store buffer can drain (2) and (4) independently since they target
different cache lines. A remote CPU may observe (4) before (2): it
sees prev->next pointing to the new node, but the new node's link.next
is still zero (kmem_cache_alloc zero-initialized via KMEM_CACHE with
SLAB_PANIC). Since offsetof(struct ftrace_event_field, link) == 0,
list_for_each_entry() derives field == NULL from link.next == 0 and
crashes at field->type (offset 0x18):
Unable to handle kernel access ... at virtual address 0000000000000018
pc : update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
Call trace:
update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
trace_event_update_all+0x7c/0x2b4
trace_module_notify+0x4c/0x1dc
notifier_call_chain+0x84/0x168
blocking_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x64/0xd4
load_module+0x10c8/0x123c
__arm64_sys_finit_module+0x230/0x31c
Fix by holding event_mutex in trace_event_update_all() before
down_write(&trace_event_sem). This serializes the reader against
event_define_fields() which takes event_mutex for the entire
write-side critical section. The lock ordering event_mutex ->
trace_event_sem is already established at three other sites
(trace_remove_event_call, event_trace_add_tracer,
event_trace_del_tracer), so this introduces no ordering conflict.
An alternative of placing mutex_lock inside update_event_fields() was
considered but rejected — it would invert the established lock
ordering (trace_event_sem -> event_mutex) and risk ABBA deadlock.
Fixes: b3bc8547d3be ("tracing: Have TRACE_DEFINE_ENUM affect trace event
types as well")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
---
kernel/trace/trace_events.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
index 956692856fa8..9632788da5af 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
@@ -3566,6 +3566,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map
**map, int len)
int last_i;
int i;
+ mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
down_write(&trace_event_sem);
list_for_each_entry_safe(call, p, &ftrace_events, list) {
/* events are usually grouped together with systems */
@@ -3604,6 +3605,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map
**map, int len)
cond_resched();
}
up_write(&trace_event_sem);
+ mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
}
static bool event_in_systems(struct trace_event_call *call,
--
2.29.0
On 7/30/2026 6:54 PM, Michael Wu wrote:
> event_define_fields() (pri=1 MODULE_STATE_COMING notifier, locked by
> event_mutex) populates class->fields via list_add(), while
> update_event_fields() (called from the pri=0 notifier path via
> trace_event_update_all) traverses class->fields protected only by
> trace_event_sem. These are two different locks guarding the same
> data structure, so during cross-module loading a reader on one CPU can
> observe partially initialized list nodes being concurrently added by a
> writer on another CPU.
>
> On arm64 with weak memory ordering, __list_add() writes to two
> different cache lines:
>
> next->prev = new; // (1) ordinary store
> new->next = next; // (2) ordinary store —
> field's cache line
> new->prev = prev; // (3) ordinary store
> WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new); // (4) release store — head's
> cache line
>
> The store buffer can drain (2) and (4) independently since they target
> different cache lines. A remote CPU may observe (4) before (2): it
> sees prev->next pointing to the new node, but the new node's link.next
> is still zero (kmem_cache_alloc zero-initialized via KMEM_CACHE with
> SLAB_PANIC). Since offsetof(struct ftrace_event_field, link) == 0,
> list_for_each_entry() derives field == NULL from link.next == 0 and
> crashes at field->type (offset 0x18):
>
> Unable to handle kernel access ... at virtual address 0000000000000018
> pc : update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
> Call trace:
> update_event_fields+0xf8/0x368
> trace_event_update_all+0x7c/0x2b4
> trace_module_notify+0x4c/0x1dc
> notifier_call_chain+0x84/0x168
> blocking_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x64/0xd4
> load_module+0x10c8/0x123c
> __arm64_sys_finit_module+0x230/0x31c
>
> Fix by holding event_mutex in trace_event_update_all() before
> down_write(&trace_event_sem). This serializes the reader against
> event_define_fields() which takes event_mutex for the entire
> write-side critical section. The lock ordering event_mutex ->
> trace_event_sem is already established at three other sites
> (trace_remove_event_call, event_trace_add_tracer,
> event_trace_del_tracer), so this introduces no ordering conflict.
>
> An alternative of placing mutex_lock inside update_event_fields() was
> considered but rejected — it would invert the established lock
> ordering (trace_event_sem -> event_mutex) and risk ABBA deadlock.
>
> Fixes: b3bc8547d3be ("tracing: Have TRACE_DEFINE_ENUM affect trace event
> types as well")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_events.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> index 956692856fa8..9632788da5af 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> @@ -3566,6 +3566,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map
> **map, int len)
> int last_i;
> int i;
>
> + mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
> down_write(&trace_event_sem);
> list_for_each_entry_safe(call, p, &ftrace_events, list) {
> /* events are usually grouped together with systems */
> @@ -3604,6 +3605,7 @@ void trace_event_update_all(struct trace_eval_map
> **map, int len)
> cond_resched();
> }
> up_write(&trace_event_sem);
> + mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
> }
>
> static bool event_in_systems(struct trace_event_call *call,
--
Regards,
Michael Wu
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-30 11:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-30 5:37 [PATCH] tracing: Fix race between update_event_fields and event_define_fields Michael Wu
2026-07-30 8:31 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2026-07-30 10:54 ` Michael Wu
2026-07-30 11:13 ` Michael Wu [this message]
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=08216429-43ba-efc2-f6b1-459210d07b02@allwinnertech.com \
--to=michael@allwinnertech.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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