From: Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/watchpoints: Disable preemption in thread_change_pc()
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:34:55 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230829063457.54157-2-bgray@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230829063457.54157-1-bgray@linux.ibm.com>
thread_change_pc() uses CPU local data, so must be protected from
swapping CPUs while it is reading the breakpoint struct.
The error is more noticeable after 1e60f3564bad ("powerpc/watchpoints:
Track perf single step directly on the breakpoint"), which added an
unconditional __this_cpu_read() call in thread_change_pc(). However the
existing __this_cpu_read() that runs if a breakpoint does need to be
re-inserted has the same issue.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com>
---
There's probably a more idiomatic way to express this. We technically
don't need to disable preemption for the entire function: we should only
need to disable preemption within each loop iteration while handling the
pointer we are working with. Each iteration itself is independent.
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
index b8513dc3e53a..2854376870cf 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
@@ -230,13 +230,15 @@ void thread_change_pc(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pt_regs *regs)
struct arch_hw_breakpoint *info;
int i;
+ preempt_disable();
+
for (i = 0; i < nr_wp_slots(); i++) {
struct perf_event *bp = __this_cpu_read(bp_per_reg[i]);
if (unlikely(bp && counter_arch_bp(bp)->perf_single_step))
goto reset;
}
- return;
+ goto out;
reset:
regs_set_return_msr(regs, regs->msr & ~MSR_SE);
@@ -245,6 +247,9 @@ void thread_change_pc(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pt_regs *regs)
__set_breakpoint(i, info);
info->perf_single_step = false;
}
+
+out:
+ preempt_enable();
}
static bool is_larx_stcx_instr(int type)
--
2.41.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-29 6:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-29 6:34 [PATCH 0/3] Fix preemption errors in watchpoints Benjamin Gray
2023-08-29 6:34 ` Benjamin Gray [this message]
2023-08-29 6:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/watchpoint: Disable pagefaults when getting user instruction Benjamin Gray
2023-08-29 6:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/watchpoints: Annotate atomic context in more places Benjamin Gray
2023-08-29 6:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] Fix preemption errors in watchpoints Benjamin Gray
2023-09-21 9:24 ` Michael Ellerman
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=20230829063457.54157-2-bgray@linux.ibm.com \
--to=bgray@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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).