[PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[Frederic Weisbecker]

While looking at task_work users I just noticed that perf doesn't flush
its own upon event exiting. This looks especially problematic with child
events. Please have a thourough look at the last patch, I may easily
have missed something within the maze.

Frederic Weisbecker (4):
  task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/
  task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
  perf: Fix event leak upon exit
  perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release

 include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
 include/linux/task_work.h  |  3 ++-
 kernel/events/core.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
 kernel/irq/manage.c        |  2 +-
 kernel/task_work.c         | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 security/keys/keyctl.c     |  2 +-
 6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

-- 
2.44.0

[PATCH 1/4] task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/

[Frederic Weisbecker]

A proper task_work_cancel() API that actually cancels a callback and not
*any* callback pointing to a given function is going to be needed for
perf events event freeing. Do the appropriate rename to prepare for
that.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/task_work.h |  2 +-
 kernel/irq/manage.c       |  2 +-
 kernel/task_work.c        | 10 +++++-----
 security/keys/keyctl.c    |  2 +-
 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/task_work.h b/include/linux/task_work.h
index 3564172dbc27..89ee2cbf044b 100644
--- a/include/linux/task_work.h
+++ b/include/linux/task_work.h
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ int task_work_add(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *twork,
 
 struct callback_head *task_work_cancel_match(struct task_struct *task,
 	bool (*match)(struct callback_head *, void *data), void *data);
-struct callback_head *task_work_cancel(struct task_struct *, task_work_func_t);
+struct callback_head *task_work_cancel_func(struct task_struct *, task_work_func_t);
 void task_work_run(void);
 
 static inline void exit_task_work(struct task_struct *task)
diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index ad3eaf2ab959..2464e98879f3 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ static int irq_thread(void *data)
 	 * synchronize_hardirq(). So neither IRQTF_RUNTHREAD nor the
 	 * oneshot mask bit can be set.
 	 */
-	task_work_cancel(current, irq_thread_dtor);
+	task_work_cancel_func(current, irq_thread_dtor);
 	return 0;
 }
 
diff --git a/kernel/task_work.c b/kernel/task_work.c
index d283f603d916..c1b4d3ba2590 100644
--- a/kernel/task_work.c
+++ b/kernel/task_work.c
@@ -120,9 +120,9 @@ static bool task_work_func_match(struct callback_head *cb, void *data)
 }
 
 /**
- * task_work_cancel - cancel a pending work added by task_work_add()
- * @task: the task which should execute the work
- * @func: identifies the work to remove
+ * task_work_cancel_func - cancel a pending work matching a function added by task_work_add()
+ * @task: the task which should execute the func's work
+ * @func: identifies the func to match with a work to remove
  *
  * Find the last queued pending work with ->func == @func and remove
  * it from queue.
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static bool task_work_func_match(struct callback_head *cb, void *data)
  * The found work or NULL if not found.
  */
 struct callback_head *
-task_work_cancel(struct task_struct *task, task_work_func_t func)
+task_work_cancel_func(struct task_struct *task, task_work_func_t func)
 {
 	return task_work_cancel_match(task, task_work_func_match, func);
 }
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ void task_work_run(void)
 		if (!work)
 			break;
 		/*
-		 * Synchronize with task_work_cancel(). It can not remove
+		 * Synchronize with task_work_cancel_match(). It can not remove
 		 * the first entry == work, cmpxchg(task_works) must fail.
 		 * But it can remove another entry from the ->next list.
 		 */
diff --git a/security/keys/keyctl.c b/security/keys/keyctl.c
index 10ba439968f7..3aff32a2bcf3 100644
--- a/security/keys/keyctl.c
+++ b/security/keys/keyctl.c
@@ -1693,7 +1693,7 @@ long keyctl_session_to_parent(void)
 		goto unlock;
 
 	/* cancel an already pending keyring replacement */
-	oldwork = task_work_cancel(parent, key_change_session_keyring);
+	oldwork = task_work_cancel_func(parent, key_change_session_keyring);
 
 	/* the replacement session keyring is applied just prior to userspace
 	 * restarting */
-- 
2.44.0

[PATCH 2/4] task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again

[Frederic Weisbecker]

Re-introduce task_work_cancel(), this time to cancel an actual callback
and not *any* callback pointing to a given function. This is going to be
needed for perf events event freeing.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/task_work.h |  1 +
 kernel/task_work.c        | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/task_work.h b/include/linux/task_work.h
index 89ee2cbf044b..58e42ef59580 100644
--- a/include/linux/task_work.h
+++ b/include/linux/task_work.h
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ int task_work_add(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *twork,
 struct callback_head *task_work_cancel_match(struct task_struct *task,
 	bool (*match)(struct callback_head *, void *data), void *data);
 struct callback_head *task_work_cancel_func(struct task_struct *, task_work_func_t);
+bool task_work_cancel(struct task_struct *, struct callback_head *twork);
 void task_work_run(void);
 
 static inline void exit_task_work(struct task_struct *task)
diff --git a/kernel/task_work.c b/kernel/task_work.c
index c1b4d3ba2590..9e85ac7632ae 100644
--- a/kernel/task_work.c
+++ b/kernel/task_work.c
@@ -136,6 +136,30 @@ task_work_cancel_func(struct task_struct *task, task_work_func_t func)
 	return task_work_cancel_match(task, task_work_func_match, func);
 }
 
+static bool task_work_match(struct callback_head *cb, void *data)
+{
+	return cb == data;
+}
+
+/**
+ * task_work_cancel - cancel a pending work added by task_work_add()
+ * @task: the task which should execute the work
+ * @func: the work to remove if queued
+ *
+ * Remove a callback from a task's queue if queued.
+ *
+ * RETURNS:
+ * True if the callback was queued and got cancelled, false otherwise.
+ */
+bool task_work_cancel(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *cb)
+{
+	struct callback_head *ret;
+
+	ret = task_work_cancel_match(task, task_work_match, cb);
+
+	return ret == cb;
+}
+
 /**
  * task_work_run - execute the works added by task_work_add()
  *
-- 
2.44.0

Re: [PATCH 2/4] task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again

[kernel test robot]

Hi Frederic,

kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:

[auto build test WARNING on perf-tools-next/perf-tools-next]
[also build test WARNING on tip/perf/core perf-tools/perf-tools linus/master acme/perf/core v6.9-rc1 next-20240328]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Frederic-Weisbecker/task_work-s-task_work_cancel-task_work_cancel_func/20240330-080207
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git perf-tools-next
patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240329235812.18917-3-frederic%40kernel.org
patch subject: [PATCH 2/4] task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
config: nios2-randconfig-r071-20240330 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240331/202403310406.TPrIela8-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: nios2-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240331/202403310406.TPrIela8-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202403310406.TPrIela8-lkp@intel.com/

All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):

>> kernel/task_work.c:155: warning: Function parameter or struct member 'cb' not described in 'task_work_cancel'
>> kernel/task_work.c:155: warning: Excess function parameter 'func' description in 'task_work_cancel'


vim +155 kernel/task_work.c

   143	
   144	/**
   145	 * task_work_cancel - cancel a pending work added by task_work_add()
   146	 * @task: the task which should execute the work
   147	 * @func: the work to remove if queued
   148	 *
   149	 * Remove a callback from a task's queue if queued.
   150	 *
   151	 * RETURNS:
   152	 * True if the callback was queued and got cancelled, false otherwise.
   153	 */
   154	bool task_work_cancel(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *cb)
 > 155	{
   156		struct callback_head *ret;
   157	
   158		ret = task_work_cancel_match(task, task_work_match, cb);
   159	
   160		return ret == cb;
   161	}
   162	

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

[PATCH 3/4] perf: Fix event leak upon exit

[Frederic Weisbecker]

When a task is scheduled out, pending sigtrap deliveries are deferred
to the target task upon resume to userspace via task_work.

However failures while adding en event's callback to the task_work
engine are ignored. And since the last call for events exit happen
after task work is eventually closed, there is a small window during
which pending sigtrap can be queued though ignored, leaking the event
refcount addition such as in the following scenario:

    TASK A
    -----

    do_exit()
       exit_task_work(tsk);

       <IRQ>
       perf_event_overflow()
          event->pending_sigtrap = pending_id;
          irq_work_queue(&event->pending_irq);
       </IRQ>
    =========> PREEMPTION: TASK A -> TASK B
       event_sched_out()
          event->pending_sigtrap = 0;
          atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&event->refcount)
          // FAILS: task work has exited
          task_work_add(&event->pending_task)
       [...]
       <IRQ WORK>
       perf_pending_irq()
          // early return: event->oncpu = -1
       </IRQ WORK>
       [...]
    =========> TASK B -> TASK A
       perf_event_exit_task(tsk)
          perf_event_exit_event()
             free_event()
                WARN(atomic_long_cmpxchg(&event->refcount, 1, 0) != 1)
                // leak event due to unexpected refcount == 2

As a result the event is never released while the task exits.

Fix this with appropriate task_work_add()'s error handling.

Fixes: 517e6a301f34 ("perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF")
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/events/core.c | 9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 724e6d7e128f..c1632e69c69d 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -2289,10 +2289,11 @@ event_sched_out(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 		event->pending_sigtrap = 0;
 		if (state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF &&
 		    !event->pending_work) {
-			event->pending_work = 1;
-			dec = false;
-			WARN_ON_ONCE(!atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&event->refcount));
-			task_work_add(current, &event->pending_task, TWA_RESUME);
+			if (task_work_add(current, &event->pending_task, TWA_RESUME) >= 0) {
+				WARN_ON_ONCE(!atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&event->refcount));
+				dec = false;
+				event->pending_work = 1;
+			}
 		}
 		if (dec)
 			local_dec(&event->ctx->nr_pending);
-- 
2.44.0

[PATCH 4/4] perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release

[Frederic Weisbecker]

The perf pending task work is never waited upon the matching event
release. In the case of a child event, released via free_event()
directly, this can potentially result in a leaked event, such as in the
following scenario that doesn't even require a weak IRQ work
implementation to trigger:

schedule()
   prepare_task_switch()
=======> <NMI>
      perf_event_overflow()
         event->pending_sigtrap = ...
         irq_work_queue(&event->pending_irq)
<======= </NMI>
      perf_event_task_sched_out()
          event_sched_out()
              event->pending_sigtrap = 0;
              atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&event->refcount)
              task_work_add(&event->pending_task)
   finish_lock_switch()
=======> <IRQ>
   perf_pending_irq()
      //do nothing, rely on pending task work
<======= </IRQ>

begin_new_exec()
   perf_event_exit_task()
      perf_event_exit_event()
         // If is child event
         free_event()
            WARN(atomic_long_cmpxchg(&event->refcount, 1, 0) != 1)
            // event is leaked

Similar scenarios can also happen with perf_event_remove_on_exec() or
simply against concurrent perf_event_release().

Fix this with synchonizing against the possibly remaining pending task
work while freeing the event, just like is done with remaining pending
IRQ work. This means that the pending task callback neither need nor
should hold a reference to the event, preventing it from ever beeing
freed.

Fixes: 517e6a301f34 ("perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF")
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
 kernel/events/core.c       | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index d2a15c0c6f8a..2f2e222e1003 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -786,6 +786,7 @@ struct perf_event {
 	struct irq_work			pending_irq;
 	struct callback_head		pending_task;
 	unsigned int			pending_work;
+	wait_queue_head_t 		pending_work_wq;
 
 	atomic_t			event_limit;
 
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index c1632e69c69d..588e35848a4e 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -2290,7 +2290,6 @@ event_sched_out(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
 		if (state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF &&
 		    !event->pending_work) {
 			if (task_work_add(current, &event->pending_task, TWA_RESUME) >= 0) {
-				WARN_ON_ONCE(!atomic_long_inc_not_zero(&event->refcount));
 				dec = false;
 				event->pending_work = 1;
 			}
@@ -5188,9 +5187,35 @@ static bool exclusive_event_installable(struct perf_event *event,
 static void perf_addr_filters_splice(struct perf_event *event,
 				       struct list_head *head);
 
+static void perf_pending_task_sync(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+	struct callback_head *head = &event->pending_task;
+
+	if (!event->pending_work)
+		return;
+	/*
+	 * If the task is queued to the current task's queue, we
+	 * obviously can't wait for it to complete. Simply cancel it.
+	 */
+	if (task_work_cancel(current, head)) {
+		event->pending_work = 0;
+		local_dec(&event->ctx->nr_pending);
+		return;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * All accesses related to the event are within the same
+	 * non-preemptible section in perf_pending_task(). The RCU
+	 * grace period before the event is freed will make sure all
+	 * those accesses are complete by then.
+	 */
+	wait_event(event->pending_work_wq, !event->pending_work);
+}
+
 static void _free_event(struct perf_event *event)
 {
 	irq_work_sync(&event->pending_irq);
+	perf_pending_task_sync(event);
 
 	unaccount_event(event);
 
@@ -6808,24 +6833,23 @@ static void perf_pending_task(struct callback_head *head)
 	struct perf_event *event = container_of(head, struct perf_event, pending_task);
 	int rctx;
 
+	preempt_disable_notrace();
 	/*
 	 * If we 'fail' here, that's OK, it means recursion is already disabled
 	 * and we won't recurse 'further'.
 	 */
-	preempt_disable_notrace();
 	rctx = perf_swevent_get_recursion_context();
 
 	if (event->pending_work) {
 		event->pending_work = 0;
 		perf_sigtrap(event);
 		local_dec(&event->ctx->nr_pending);
+		wake_up(&event->pending_work_wq);
 	}
 
 	if (rctx >= 0)
 		perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(rctx);
 	preempt_enable_notrace();
-
-	put_event(event);
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_GUEST_PERF_EVENTS
@@ -11933,6 +11957,7 @@ perf_event_alloc(struct perf_event_attr *attr, int cpu,
 	init_waitqueue_head(&event->waitq);
 	init_irq_work(&event->pending_irq, perf_pending_irq);
 	init_task_work(&event->pending_task, perf_pending_task);
+	init_waitqueue_head(&event->pending_work_wq);
 
 	mutex_init(&event->mmap_mutex);
 	raw_spin_lock_init(&event->addr_filters.lock);
-- 
2.44.0

Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[Ian Rogers]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 4:58 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> While looking at task_work users I just noticed that perf doesn't flush
> its own upon event exiting. This looks especially problematic with child
> events. Please have a thourough look at the last patch, I may easily
> have missed something within the maze.
>
> Frederic Weisbecker (4):
>   task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/
>   task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
>   perf: Fix event leak upon exit
>   perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release
>
>  include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
>  include/linux/task_work.h  |  3 ++-
>  kernel/events/core.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  kernel/irq/manage.c        |  2 +-
>  kernel/task_work.c         | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  security/keys/keyctl.c     |  2 +-
>  6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

Thanks for this! I wonder if this relates to fuzzing failures like:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/CAP-5=fUa+-Tj2b_hxk96Qg5=Qu7jYHgHREbsmBa2ZmuF-X9QaA@mail.gmail.com/
"[ 2519.138665] unexpected event refcount: 2; ptr=000000009c56b097"

Thanks,
Ian

> --
> 2.44.0
>

Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[Frederic Weisbecker]

Le Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 08:23:49PM -0700, Ian Rogers a écrit :
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 4:58 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > While looking at task_work users I just noticed that perf doesn't flush
> > its own upon event exiting. This looks especially problematic with child
> > events. Please have a thourough look at the last patch, I may easily
> > have missed something within the maze.
> >
> > Frederic Weisbecker (4):
> >   task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/
> >   task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
> >   perf: Fix event leak upon exit
> >   perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release
> >
> >  include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
> >  include/linux/task_work.h  |  3 ++-
> >  kernel/events/core.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  kernel/irq/manage.c        |  2 +-
> >  kernel/task_work.c         | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  security/keys/keyctl.c     |  2 +-
> >  6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> Thanks for this! I wonder if this relates to fuzzing failures like:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/CAP-5=fUa+-Tj2b_hxk96Qg5=Qu7jYHgHREbsmBa2ZmuF-X9QaA@mail.gmail.com/
> "[ 2519.138665] unexpected event refcount: 2; ptr=000000009c56b097"

Probably not since those seem to happen on perf_event_open() failures. This
looks different.

Thanks.


> 
> Thanks,
> Ian
> 
> > --
> > 2.44.0
> >

Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 09:43:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Le Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 08:23:49PM -0700, Ian Rogers a écrit :
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 4:58 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > While looking at task_work users I just noticed that perf doesn't flush
> > > its own upon event exiting. This looks especially problematic with child
> > > events. Please have a thourough look at the last patch, I may easily
> > > have missed something within the maze.
> > >
> > > Frederic Weisbecker (4):
> > >   task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/
> > >   task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
> > >   perf: Fix event leak upon exit
> > >   perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release
> > >
> > >  include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
> > >  include/linux/task_work.h  |  3 ++-
> > >  kernel/events/core.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > >  kernel/irq/manage.c        |  2 +-
> > >  kernel/task_work.c         | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > >  security/keys/keyctl.c     |  2 +-
> > >  6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Thanks for this! I wonder if this relates to fuzzing failures like:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/CAP-5=fUa+-Tj2b_hxk96Qg5=Qu7jYHgHREbsmBa2ZmuF-X9QaA@mail.gmail.com/
> > "[ 2519.138665] unexpected event refcount: 2; ptr=000000009c56b097"
> 
> Probably not since those seem to happen on perf_event_open() failures. This
> looks different.

Probably clashes with this one?

"[PATCH v3 0/4] perf: Make SIGTRAP and __perf_pending_irq() work on RT."

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240322065208.60456-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/T/#u

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf: Fix leaked events when sigtrap = 1

[Frederic Weisbecker]

Le Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 05:20:27PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 09:43:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Le Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 08:23:49PM -0700, Ian Rogers a écrit :
> > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 4:58 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > While looking at task_work users I just noticed that perf doesn't flush
> > > > its own upon event exiting. This looks especially problematic with child
> > > > events. Please have a thourough look at the last patch, I may easily
> > > > have missed something within the maze.
> > > >
> > > > Frederic Weisbecker (4):
> > > >   task_work: s/task_work_cancel()/task_work_cancel_func()/
> > > >   task_work: Introduce task_work_cancel() again
> > > >   perf: Fix event leak upon exit
> > > >   perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release
> > > >
> > > >  include/linux/perf_event.h |  1 +
> > > >  include/linux/task_work.h  |  3 ++-
> > > >  kernel/events/core.c       | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > > >  kernel/irq/manage.c        |  2 +-
> > > >  kernel/task_work.c         | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > >  security/keys/keyctl.c     |  2 +-
> > > >  6 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > Thanks for this! I wonder if this relates to fuzzing failures like:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/CAP-5=fUa+-Tj2b_hxk96Qg5=Qu7jYHgHREbsmBa2ZmuF-X9QaA@mail.gmail.com/
> > > "[ 2519.138665] unexpected event refcount: 2; ptr=000000009c56b097"
> > 
> > Probably not since those seem to happen on perf_event_open() failures. This
> > looks different.
> 
> Probably clashes with this one?
> 
> "[PATCH v3 0/4] perf: Make SIGTRAP and __perf_pending_irq() work on RT."
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240322065208.60456-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/T/#u

Nice, I think it partially fixes the issues I've seen. Lemme review that.

Thanks.

> 
> - Arnaldo