[PATCH 0/3] powerpc: fix preempt_count imbalances in perf and kexec paths

[PATCH 0/3] powerpc: fix preempt_count imbalances in perf and kexec paths

[Aboorva Devarajan]

Hi all,

This patch series fixes some minor preempt_count bookkeeping issues in
arch/powerpc/ found during a preemption leak audit prompted by the
lazy/full preemption model changes. These are get_cpu/put_cpu and
get_cpu_var/put_cpu_var pairing errors that leave preempt_count
incorrectly elevated or underflowed.

Please let me know your comments.

Thanks,
Aboorva

Aboorva Devarajan (3):
  powerpc/perf: fix preempt count underflow in fsl_emb_pmu_del
  powerpc/powernv: fix preempt count leak in
    pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down
  powerpc/kexec: fix double get_cpu() imbalance in kexec_prepare_cpus

 arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c           | 15 ++++++++-------
 arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c       |  3 ++-
 arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

-- 
2.54.0

[PATCH 1/3] powerpc/perf: fix preempt count underflow in fsl_emb_pmu_del

[Aboorva Devarajan]

fsl_emb_pmu_del() unconditionally calls put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events) at
the 'out:' label, but only calls the matching get_cpu_var() after the
'i < 0' early-return check. When event->hw.idx is negative the
function jumps to 'out:' without having taken get_cpu_var(), and the
trailing put_cpu_var() then issues an unmatched preempt_enable(),
underflowing preempt_count.

On a CONFIG_PREEMPT=y kernel preempt_count would underflow and
eventually present as a 'scheduling while atomic' BUG.

Move put_cpu_var() to pair with get_cpu_var() so the percpu access is
correctly bracketed and the 'out:' label only handles perf_pmu_enable.

Fixes: a11106544f33c ("powerpc/perf: e500 support")
Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
index 7120ab20cbfec..02b5dd74c187a 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
@@ -366,9 +366,10 @@ static void fsl_emb_pmu_del(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
 
 	cpuhw->n_events--;
 
+	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
+
  out:
 	perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
-	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
 }
 
 static void fsl_emb_pmu_start(struct perf_event *event, int ef_flags)
-- 
2.54.0

Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/perf: fix preempt count underflow in fsl_emb_pmu_del

[Shrikanth Hegde]

On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> fsl_emb_pmu_del() unconditionally calls put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events) at
> the 'out:' label, but only calls the matching get_cpu_var() after the
> 'i < 0' early-return check. When event->hw.idx is negative the
> function jumps to 'out:' without having taken get_cpu_var(), and the
> trailing put_cpu_var() then issues an unmatched preempt_enable(),
> underflowing preempt_count.
> 
> On a CONFIG_PREEMPT=y kernel preempt_count would underflow and
> eventually present as a 'scheduling while atomic' BUG.
> 
> Move put_cpu_var() to pair with get_cpu_var() so the percpu access is
> correctly bracketed and the 'out:' label only handles perf_pmu_enable.
> 
> Fixes: a11106544f33c ("powerpc/perf: e500 support")
> Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>   arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c | 3 ++-
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> index 7120ab20cbfec..02b5dd74c187a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> @@ -366,9 +366,10 @@ static void fsl_emb_pmu_del(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
>   
>   	cpuhw->n_events--;
>   
> +	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
> +
>    out:
>   	perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
> -	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
>   }
>   
>   static void fsl_emb_pmu_start(struct perf_event *event, int ef_flags)

Thanks for fixing this. Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/perf: fix preempt count underflow in fsl_emb_pmu_del

[Aboorva Devarajan]

On Mon, 2026-05-18 at 11:43 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> > fsl_emb_pmu_del() unconditionally calls put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events)
> > at
> > the 'out:' label, but only calls the matching get_cpu_var() after
> > the
> > 'i < 0' early-return check. When event->hw.idx is negative the
> > function jumps to 'out:' without having taken get_cpu_var(), and
> > the
> > trailing put_cpu_var() then issues an unmatched preempt_enable(),
> > underflowing preempt_count.
> > 
> > On a CONFIG_PREEMPT=y kernel preempt_count would underflow and
> > eventually present as a 'scheduling while atomic' BUG.
> > 
> > Move put_cpu_var() to pair with get_cpu_var() so the percpu access
> > is
> > correctly bracketed and the 'out:' label only handles
> > perf_pmu_enable.
> > 
> > Fixes: a11106544f33c ("powerpc/perf: e500 support")
> > Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c | 3 ++-
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> > b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> > index 7120ab20cbfec..02b5dd74c187a 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c
> > @@ -366,9 +366,10 @@ static void fsl_emb_pmu_del(struct perf_event
> > *event, int flags)
> >   
> >   	cpuhw->n_events--;
> >   
> > +	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
> > +
> >    out:
> >   	perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
> > -	put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events);
> >   }
> >   
> >   static void fsl_emb_pmu_start(struct perf_event *event, int
> > ef_flags)
> 
> Thanks for fixing this. Looks good to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>


Hi Shrikanth,

Thanks for the review.

Regards,
Aboorva

[PATCH 2/3] powerpc/powernv: fix preempt count leak in pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down

[Aboorva Devarajan]

pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down() calls get_cpu() to obtain the current
CPU id but never calls the matching put_cpu(), leaking one
preempt_disable() nesting level on every invocation.

In practice the imbalance does not trigger a visible splat because the
kexec teardown path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already disabled, no
schedule() occurs after the leak, and default_machine_kexec() overwrites
preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET before jumping into kexec_sequence()
which never returns. However the bookkeeping is still wrong.

In the kexec teardown path IRQs are already disabled and the CPU is
pinned, so get_cpu()'s preempt_disable() side-effect is unnecessary.
Replace get_cpu() with raw_smp_processor_id() which returns the CPU id
without touching preempt_count.

Fixes: 298b34d7d578 ("powerpc/powernv: Fix kexec races going back to OPAL")
Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
index 4dbb47ddbdcc4..177da0defcb36 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static void pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down(void)
 {
 	int my_cpu, i, notified = -1;
 
-	my_cpu = get_cpu();
+	my_cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
 
 	for_each_online_cpu(i) {
 		uint8_t status;
-- 
2.54.0

Re: [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/powernv: fix preempt count leak in pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down

[Shrikanth Hegde]

Hi Aboorva.

On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down() calls get_cpu() to obtain the current
> CPU id but never calls the matching put_cpu(), leaking one
> preempt_disable() nesting level on every invocation.
> 
> In practice the imbalance does not trigger a visible splat because the
> kexec teardown path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already disabled, no
> schedule() occurs after the leak, and default_machine_kexec() overwrites
> preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET before jumping into kexec_sequence()
> which never returns. However the bookkeeping is still wrong.
> 
> In the kexec teardown path IRQs are already disabled and the CPU is
> pinned, so get_cpu()'s preempt_disable() side-effect is unnecessary.
> Replace get_cpu() with raw_smp_processor_id() which returns the CPU id
> without touching preempt_count.
> 
> Fixes: 298b34d7d578 ("powerpc/powernv: Fix kexec races going back to OPAL")
> Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>   arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> index 4dbb47ddbdcc4..177da0defcb36 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> @@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static void pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down(void)
>   {
>   	int my_cpu, i, notified = -1;
>   
> -	my_cpu = get_cpu();
> +	my_cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
>   

Is it always with irq-disabled?
How about !CONFIG_SMP and in kexec_prepare_cpus. I see it disables interrupt later.
(though it is a less common config)

So use smp_processor_id()?? One could compile with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y and
see any reports.

>   	for_each_online_cpu(i) {
>   		uint8_t status;

Re: [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/powernv: fix preempt count leak in pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down

[Aboorva Devarajan]

On Mon, 2026-05-18 at 13:26 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> 
> Hi Aboorva.
> 
> On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> > pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down() calls get_cpu() to obtain the current
> > CPU id but never calls the matching put_cpu(), leaking one
> > preempt_disable() nesting level on every invocation.
> > 
> > In practice the imbalance does not trigger a visible splat because the
> > kexec teardown path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already disabled, no
> > schedule() occurs after the leak, and default_machine_kexec() overwrites
> > preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET before jumping into kexec_sequence()
> > which never returns. However the bookkeeping is still wrong.
> > 
> > In the kexec teardown path IRQs are already disabled and the CPU is
> > pinned, so get_cpu()'s preempt_disable() side-effect is unnecessary.
> > Replace get_cpu() with raw_smp_processor_id() which returns the CPU id
> > without touching preempt_count.
> > 
> > Fixes: 298b34d7d578 ("powerpc/powernv: Fix kexec races going back to OPAL")
> > Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> > index 4dbb47ddbdcc4..177da0defcb36 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/setup.c
> > @@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static void pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down(void)
> >   {
> >   	int my_cpu, i, notified = -1;
> >   
> > -	my_cpu = get_cpu();
> > +	my_cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> >   
> 
> Is it always with irq-disabled?
> How about !CONFIG_SMP and in kexec_prepare_cpus. I see it disables interrupt later.
> (though it is a less common config)
> 

IIUC, PPC_POWERNV does 'select FORCE_SMP' (-> selects SMP), so there is no
!CONFIG_SMP powernv build. The !SMP kexec_prepare_cpus() variant in
arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c, the one you spotted that calls
ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down() before local_irq_disable() is therefore
never compiled with powernv, so pnv_kexec_cpu_down() ->
pnv_kexec_wait_secondaries_down() can't be reached through it.
so, IRQs are disabled in every case that reaches this function.


> So use smp_processor_id()?? One could compile with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y and
> see any reports.
> 
> >   	for_each_online_cpu(i) {
> >   		uint8_t status;

sure, I'll switch to smp_processor_id() in v2 rather than raw_smp_processor_id().
It returns the cpu id without touching preempt_count (so the leak is
gone), and unlike the raw variant it keeps the CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT
check which is a no-op here since IRQs are off, but will flag any
future caller that reaches this path while preemptible instead of
silently hiding it.


Thanks,
Aboorva

[PATCH 3/3] powerpc/kexec: fix double get_cpu() imbalance in kexec_prepare_cpus

[Aboorva Devarajan]

kexec_prepare_cpus_wait() calls get_cpu() internally to obtain the
current CPU id. kexec_prepare_cpus() calls kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
twice -- once for KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF and once for
KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE -- but only issues a single put_cpu() at the end,
leaving preempt_count elevated by one extra nesting level.

In practice the imbalance does not trigger a 'scheduling while atomic'
splat because the kexec path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already
disabled, no schedule() occurs after the leak, and
default_machine_kexec() overwrites preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET
before jumping into kexec_sequence() which never returns. However the
bookkeeping is still wrong.

Lift the get_cpu()/put_cpu() pair into kexec_prepare_cpus() so it is
called exactly once, and pass the CPU id to kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
as a parameter. This keeps preempt_count correctly balanced.

Fixes: 1fc711f7ffb01 ("powerpc/kexec: Fix race in kexec shutdown")
Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c | 15 ++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
index 825ab8a88f18e..9d7e5a1e6e5b8 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
@@ -164,12 +164,11 @@ static void kexec_smp_down(void *arg)
 	/* NOTREACHED */
 }
 
-static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state)
+static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state, int my_cpu)
 {
-	int my_cpu, i, notified=-1;
+	int i, notified = -1;
 
 	hw_breakpoint_disable();
-	my_cpu = get_cpu();
 	/* Make sure each CPU has at least made it to the state we need.
 	 *
 	 * FIXME: There is a (slim) chance of a problem if not all of the CPUs
@@ -246,6 +245,8 @@ static void wake_offline_cpus(void)
 
 static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
 {
+	int my_cpu;
+
 	wake_offline_cpus();
 	smp_call_function(kexec_smp_down, NULL, /* wait */0);
 	local_irq_disable();
@@ -254,7 +255,8 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
 	mb(); /* make sure IRQs are disabled before we say they are */
 	get_paca()->kexec_state = KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF;
 
-	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF);
+	my_cpu = get_cpu();
+	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF, my_cpu);
 	/* we are sure every CPU has IRQs off at this point */
 	kexec_all_irq_disabled = 1;
 
@@ -262,13 +264,12 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
 	 * Before removing MMU mappings make sure all CPUs have entered real
 	 * mode:
 	 */
-	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE);
+	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE, my_cpu);
+	put_cpu();
 
 	/* after we tell the others to go down */
 	if (ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down)
 		ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down(0, 0);
-
-	put_cpu();
 }
 
 #else /* ! SMP */
-- 
2.54.0

Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/kexec: fix double get_cpu() imbalance in kexec_prepare_cpus

[Shrikanth Hegde]

Hi Aboorva.

On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> kexec_prepare_cpus_wait() calls get_cpu() internally to obtain the
> current CPU id. kexec_prepare_cpus() calls kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
> twice -- once for KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF and once for
> KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE -- but only issues a single put_cpu() at the end,
> leaving preempt_count elevated by one extra nesting level.
> 
> In practice the imbalance does not trigger a 'scheduling while atomic'
> splat because the kexec path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already
> disabled, no schedule() occurs after the leak, and
> default_machine_kexec() overwrites preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET
> before jumping into kexec_sequence() which never returns. However the
> bookkeeping is still wrong.
> 
> Lift the get_cpu()/put_cpu() pair into kexec_prepare_cpus() so it is
> called exactly once, and pass the CPU id to kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
> as a parameter. This keeps preempt_count correctly balanced.
> 
> Fixes: 1fc711f7ffb01 ("powerpc/kexec: Fix race in kexec shutdown")
> Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>   arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> index 825ab8a88f18e..9d7e5a1e6e5b8 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> @@ -164,12 +164,11 @@ static void kexec_smp_down(void *arg)
>   	/* NOTREACHED */
>   }
>   
> -static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state)
> +static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state, int my_cpu)
>   {
> -	int my_cpu, i, notified=-1;
> +	int i, notified = -1;
>   
>   	hw_breakpoint_disable();
> -	my_cpu = get_cpu();
>   	/* Make sure each CPU has at least made it to the state we need.
>   	 *
>   	 * FIXME: There is a (slim) chance of a problem if not all of the CPUs
> @@ -246,6 +245,8 @@ static void wake_offline_cpus(void)
>   
>   static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>   {
> +	int my_cpu;
> +
>   	wake_offline_cpus();
>   	smp_call_function(kexec_smp_down, NULL, /* wait */0);
>   	local_irq_disable();
> @@ -254,7 +255,8 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>   	mb(); /* make sure IRQs are disabled before we say they are */
>   	get_paca()->kexec_state = KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF;
>   
> -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF);
> +	my_cpu = get_cpu();

raw_smp_processor_id() is better here. All it needs is get current cpu?
caller does irq_disable above and that renders call for get_cpu un-necessary.


> +	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF, my_cpu);
>   	/* we are sure every CPU has IRQs off at this point */
>   	kexec_all_irq_disabled = 1;
>   
> @@ -262,13 +264,12 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>   	 * Before removing MMU mappings make sure all CPUs have entered real
>   	 * mode:
>   	 */
> -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE);
> +	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE, my_cpu);
> +	put_cpu();
>   
>   	/* after we tell the others to go down */
>   	if (ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down)
>   		ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down(0, 0);
> -
> -	put_cpu();
>   }
>   
>   #else /* ! SMP */

Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/kexec: fix double get_cpu() imbalance in kexec_prepare_cpus

[Aboorva Devarajan]

Hi Shrikanth,

On Mon, 2026-05-18 at 11:32 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> Hi Aboorva.
> 
> On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> > kexec_prepare_cpus_wait() calls get_cpu() internally to obtain the
> > current CPU id. kexec_prepare_cpus() calls kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
> > twice -- once for KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF and once for
> > KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE -- but only issues a single put_cpu() at the end,
> > leaving preempt_count elevated by one extra nesting level.
> > 
> > In practice the imbalance does not trigger a 'scheduling while atomic'
> > splat because the kexec path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already
> > disabled, no schedule() occurs after the leak, and
> > default_machine_kexec() overwrites preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET
> > before jumping into kexec_sequence() which never returns. However the
> > bookkeeping is still wrong.
> > 
> > Lift the get_cpu()/put_cpu() pair into kexec_prepare_cpus() so it is
> > called exactly once, and pass the CPU id to kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
> > as a parameter. This keeps preempt_count correctly balanced.
> > 
> > Fixes: 1fc711f7ffb01 ("powerpc/kexec: Fix race in kexec shutdown")
> > Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c | 15 ++++++++-------
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> > index 825ab8a88f18e..9d7e5a1e6e5b8 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
> > @@ -164,12 +164,11 @@ static void kexec_smp_down(void *arg)
> >   	/* NOTREACHED */
> >   }
> >   
> > -static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state)
> > +static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state, int my_cpu)
> >   {
> > -	int my_cpu, i, notified=-1;
> > +	int i, notified = -1;
> >   
> >   	hw_breakpoint_disable();
> > -	my_cpu = get_cpu();
> >   	/* Make sure each CPU has at least made it to the state we need.
> >   	 *
> >   	 * FIXME: There is a (slim) chance of a problem if not all of the CPUs
> > @@ -246,6 +245,8 @@ static void wake_offline_cpus(void)
> >   
> >   static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
> >   {
> > +	int my_cpu;
> > +
> >   	wake_offline_cpus();
> >   	smp_call_function(kexec_smp_down, NULL, /* wait */0);
> >   	local_irq_disable();
> > @@ -254,7 +255,8 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
> >   	mb(); /* make sure IRQs are disabled before we say they are */
> >   	get_paca()->kexec_state = KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF;
> >   
> > -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF);
> > +	my_cpu = get_cpu();

> raw_smp_processor_id() is better here. All it needs is get current cpu?
> caller does irq_disable above and that renders call for get_cpu un-necessary.

Agreed, get_cpu() is not needed here. kexec_prepare_cpus() already does
local_irq_disable()/hard_irq_disable() before calling
kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(), so we only need the current cpu id.

I will go ahead with smp_processor_id() rather than
raw_smp_processor_id() to stay consistent with Patch 2 and to keep the
CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT check.

> >   
> > @@ -262,13 +264,12 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
> >   	 * Before removing MMU mappings make sure all CPUs have entered real
> >   	 * mode:
> >   	 */
> > -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE);
> > +	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE, my_cpu);
> > +	put_cpu();
> >   
> >   	/* after we tell the others to go down */
> >   	if (ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down)
> >   		ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down(0, 0);
> > -
> > -	put_cpu();
> >   }
> >   
> >   #else /* ! SMP */

Regards,
Aboorva

Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/kexec: fix double get_cpu() imbalance in kexec_prepare_cpus

[Shrikanth Hegde]

On 6/3/26 11:44 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> Hi Shrikanth,
> 
> On Mon, 2026-05-18 at 11:32 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
>> Hi Aboorva.
>>
>> On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
>>> kexec_prepare_cpus_wait() calls get_cpu() internally to obtain the
>>> current CPU id. kexec_prepare_cpus() calls kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
>>> twice -- once for KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF and once for
>>> KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE -- but only issues a single put_cpu() at the end,
>>> leaving preempt_count elevated by one extra nesting level.
>>>
>>> In practice the imbalance does not trigger a 'scheduling while atomic'
>>> splat because the kexec path is a one-way trip: IRQs are already
>>> disabled, no schedule() occurs after the leak, and
>>> default_machine_kexec() overwrites preempt_count with HARDIRQ_OFFSET
>>> before jumping into kexec_sequence() which never returns. However the
>>> bookkeeping is still wrong.
>>>
>>> Lift the get_cpu()/put_cpu() pair into kexec_prepare_cpus() so it is
>>> called exactly once, and pass the CPU id to kexec_prepare_cpus_wait()
>>> as a parameter. This keeps preempt_count correctly balanced.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 1fc711f7ffb01 ("powerpc/kexec: Fix race in kexec shutdown")
>>> Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>>>    1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
>>> index 825ab8a88f18e..9d7e5a1e6e5b8 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/core_64.c
>>> @@ -164,12 +164,11 @@ static void kexec_smp_down(void *arg)
>>>    	/* NOTREACHED */
>>>    }
>>>    
>>> -static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state)
>>> +static void kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(int wait_state, int my_cpu)
>>>    {
>>> -	int my_cpu, i, notified=-1;
>>> +	int i, notified = -1;
>>>    
>>>    	hw_breakpoint_disable();
>>> -	my_cpu = get_cpu();
>>>    	/* Make sure each CPU has at least made it to the state we need.
>>>    	 *
>>>    	 * FIXME: There is a (slim) chance of a problem if not all of the CPUs
>>> @@ -246,6 +245,8 @@ static void wake_offline_cpus(void)
>>>    
>>>    static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>>>    {
>>> +	int my_cpu;
>>> +
>>>    	wake_offline_cpus();
>>>    	smp_call_function(kexec_smp_down, NULL, /* wait */0);
>>>    	local_irq_disable();
>>> @@ -254,7 +255,8 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>>>    	mb(); /* make sure IRQs are disabled before we say they are */
>>>    	get_paca()->kexec_state = KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF;
>>>    
>>> -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_IRQS_OFF);
>>> +	my_cpu = get_cpu();
> 
>> raw_smp_processor_id() is better here. All it needs is get current cpu?
>> caller does irq_disable above and that renders call for get_cpu un-necessary.
> 
> Agreed, get_cpu() is not needed here. kexec_prepare_cpus() already does
> local_irq_disable()/hard_irq_disable() before calling
> kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(), so we only need the current cpu id.
> 
> I will go ahead with smp_processor_id() rather than
> raw_smp_processor_id() to stay consistent with Patch 2 and to keep the
> CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT check.


If the irq's are disabled then use raw_smp_processor_id() in both the places.
For patch2, just put a comment saying irq's are disabled when its get there.

> 
>>>    
>>> @@ -262,13 +264,12 @@ static void kexec_prepare_cpus(void)
>>>    	 * Before removing MMU mappings make sure all CPUs have entered real
>>>    	 * mode:
>>>    	 */
>>> -	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE);
>>> +	kexec_prepare_cpus_wait(KEXEC_STATE_REAL_MODE, my_cpu);
>>> +	put_cpu();
>>>    
>>>    	/* after we tell the others to go down */
>>>    	if (ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down)
>>>    		ppc_md.kexec_cpu_down(0, 0);
>>> -
>>> -	put_cpu();
>>>    }
>>>    
>>>    #else /* ! SMP */
> 
> Regards,
> Aboorva

Re: [PATCH 0/3] powerpc: fix preempt_count imbalances in perf and kexec paths

[Shrikanth Hegde]

Hi Aboorva,

On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This patch series fixes some minor preempt_count bookkeeping issues in
> arch/powerpc/ found during a preemption leak audit prompted by the
> lazy/full preemption model changes. These are get_cpu/put_cpu and
> get_cpu_var/put_cpu_var pairing errors that leave preempt_count
> incorrectly elevated or underflowed.
> 

Thanks for fixing some of these.

while we do this, Can you fix these mismatch in preempt disable/enable in
below files as well.

1. kernel/kprobes.c - kprobe_handler - Does disable, but doesn't enable in some return paths.
    A definite leak.

2. Maybe platforms/pseries/lpar.c and platforms/powernv/opal-tracepoints.c.
    In __trace_hcall_entry/exit.  It maybe a very corner case,
    I don't see a big concern there. But it may be remotely possible.
    Need to evaluate whether it should be fixed or not.

Re: [PATCH 0/3] powerpc: fix preempt_count imbalances in perf and kexec paths

[Aboorva Devarajan]

On Mon, 2026-05-18 at 13:38 +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> Hi Aboorva,
> 
> On 5/18/26 10:38 AM, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This patch series fixes some minor preempt_count bookkeeping issues in
> > arch/powerpc/ found during a preemption leak audit prompted by the
> > lazy/full preemption model changes. These are get_cpu/put_cpu and
> > get_cpu_var/put_cpu_var pairing errors that leave preempt_count
> > incorrectly elevated or underflowed.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for fixing some of these.
> 
> while we do this, Can you fix these mismatch in preempt disable/enable in
> below files as well.
> 
> 1. kernel/kprobes.c - kprobe_handler - Does disable, but doesn't enable in some return paths.
>     A definite leak.
> 
> 2. Maybe platforms/pseries/lpar.c and platforms/powernv/opal-tracepoints.c.
>     In __trace_hcall_entry/exit.  It maybe a very corner case,
>     I don't see a big concern there. But it may be remotely possible.
>     Need to evaluate whether it should be fixed or not.


Thanks for the pointers. I'll go through these and get back.

Regards,
Aboorva