From: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@linux.dev>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org,
ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me,
haoluo@google.com
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
martin.lau@kernel.org, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: Add preempt disable for bpf_get_stackid
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 17:58:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9da8a837-697b-4753-bdd7-e0e766c9221e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0062e81b59efb3839bd4f9a3459cc54730dbbfb9dd2f688df72d3b4669cab90e@mail.kernel.org>
在 2026/2/6 17:34, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org 写道:
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>> index 1b100a03ef2e..d263f851f084 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> @@ -280,12 +297,22 @@ static long __bpf_get_stackid(struct bpf_map *map,
>> /* for build_id+offset, pop a bucket before slow cmp */
>> new_bucket = (struct stack_map_bucket *)
>> pcpu_freelist_pop(&smap->freelist);
>> - if (unlikely(!new_bucket))
>> - return -ENOMEM;
>> + if (unlikely(!new_bucket)) {
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>> + goto go_out;
>> + }
>> new_bucket->nr = trace_nr;
>> id_offs = (struct bpf_stack_build_id *)new_bucket->data;
>> for (i = 0; i < trace_nr; i++)
>> id_offs[i].ip = ips[i];
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * It is safe after perf callchain ips copied to bucket buffer
>> + * to reduce the length of preempt section, we can enable preempt here.
>> + */
>> + if (!trace_in)
>> + preempt_enable();
>> +
>
> When the stack_map_use_build_id() path falls through to insert a new entry
> (neither the hash_matches early return nor the -EEXIST early return is
> taken), this preempt_enable() is called here, and then the code continues
> to go_out where preempt_enable() is called again.
>
> The sequence when trace_in == NULL:
>
> preempt_disable() // entering __bpf_get_stackid
> ...
> if (!trace_in)
> preempt_enable(); // here, after copying IPs
> ...
> // fall through to insert new entry
> new_bucket->hash = hash;
> ...
> xchg(&smap->buckets[id], new_bucket);
> ...
> go_out:
> if (!trace_in)
> preempt_enable(); // second enable - imbalanced
>
> The two direct returns (return id and return -EEXIST) after the early
> preempt_enable() correctly bypass go_out. However, when inserting a new
> stack trace (the normal case when no exact match exists and the bucket
> can be reused), the code falls through to go_out and calls preempt_enable()
> a second time.
>
will fix it in v3, and wait for other comments from matainers.
> Could this cause preempt_count underflow when using BPF_F_STACK_BUILD_ID
> maps with bpf_get_stackid()?
>
>> @@ -317,31 +349,21 @@ static long __bpf_get_stackid(struct bpf_map *map,
>> old_bucket = xchg(&smap->buckets[id], new_bucket);
>> if (old_bucket)
>> pcpu_freelist_push(&smap->freelist, &old_bucket->fnode);
>> - return id;
>> +
>> +go_out:
>> + if (!trace_in)
>> + preempt_enable();
>> + return ret;
>> }
>
>
> ---
> AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
> See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
>
> CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/21745231308
>
> AI-authorship-score: low
> AI-authorship-explanation: The commit shows typical human patterns including a control-flow bug from manual refactoring that AI would likely catch, combined with natural but slightly awkward phrasing in comments.
> issues-found: 1
> issue-severity-score: high
> issue-severity-explanation: Preempt count underflow in the build_id path causes kernel warnings and potential system instability when inserting new stack traces.
--
Best Regards
Tao Chen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-06 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-06 9:06 [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Add preempt disable for bpf_get_stack Tao Chen
2026-02-06 9:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: Add preempt disable for bpf_get_stackid Tao Chen
2026-02-06 9:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-02-06 9:58 ` Tao Chen [this message]
2026-02-06 17:20 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-02-11 7:18 ` Tao Chen
2026-02-06 14:19 ` [syzbot ci] Re: bpf: Add preempt disable for bpf_get_stack syzbot ci
2026-02-06 17:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] " Andrii Nakryiko
2026-02-11 7:10 ` Tao Chen
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=9da8a837-697b-4753-bdd7-e0e766c9221e@linux.dev \
--to=chen.dylane@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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