[PATCH bpf-next 0/2] bpf: Fix WARNING in bpf_trampoline_multi_detach

[PATCH bpf-next 0/2] bpf: Fix WARNING in bpf_trampoline_multi_detach

[Leon Hwang]

Since tracing_multi link does not set ftrace_managed, it would fail to
release the tracing_multi link when attaching tracing_multi link and
then attaching fentry link.

[    3.714215] WARNING: kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:1727 at bpf_trampoline_multi_detach+0x20b/0x240, CPU#1: test_progs/97
...
[    3.733170]  bpf_tracing_multi_link_release+0x14/0x30
[    3.733890]  bpf_link_free+0x58/0x130
[    3.734414]  bpf_link_release+0x23/0x30

Fix it by setting 'ftrace_managed = true' in register_fentry_multi().

Note: the reason of targeting bpf-next tree is I'm planning to add
tracing_multi link support for bpf progs, that would rely on the fix and
have code conflict with the test.

Leon Hwang (2):
  bpf: Mark tracing_multi trampolines as ftrace managed
  selftests/bpf: Test fentry link after tracing_multi link

 kernel/bpf/trampoline.c                       |  1 +
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c  | 69 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c    |  8 +++
 3 files changed, 78 insertions(+)

-- 
2.55.0

[PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Mark tracing_multi trampolines as ftrace managed

[Leon Hwang]

Since tracing_multi link does not set ftrace_managed, it would fail to
release the tracing_multi link when attaching tracing_multi link and
then attaching fentry link.

[    3.714215] WARNING: kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:1727 at bpf_trampoline_multi_detach+0x20b/0x240, CPU#1: test_progs/97
...
[    3.733170]  bpf_tracing_multi_link_release+0x14/0x30
[    3.733890]  bpf_link_free+0x58/0x130
[    3.734414]  bpf_link_release+0x23/0x30

Fix it by setting 'ftrace_managed = true' in register_fentry_multi().

Fixes: aef4dfa790b2 ("bpf: Add bpf_trampoline_multi_attach/detach functions")
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
 kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
index 1a721fc4bef5..6eadf64f7ec9 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
@@ -1536,6 +1536,7 @@ static int register_fentry_multi(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, struct bpf_tramp_ima
 	if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
 		addr = ftrace_jmp_set(addr);
 
+	tr->func.ftrace_managed = true;
 	ftrace_hash_add(data->reg, data->entry, ip, addr);
 	tr->cur_image = im;
 	return 0;
-- 
2.55.0

Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Mark tracing_multi trampolines as ftrace managed

[Jiri Olsa]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 10:47:33PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
> Since tracing_multi link does not set ftrace_managed, it would fail to
> release the tracing_multi link when attaching tracing_multi link and
> then attaching fentry link.
> 
> [    3.714215] WARNING: kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:1727 at bpf_trampoline_multi_detach+0x20b/0x240, CPU#1: test_progs/97
> ...
> [    3.733170]  bpf_tracing_multi_link_release+0x14/0x30
> [    3.733890]  bpf_link_free+0x58/0x130
> [    3.734414]  bpf_link_release+0x23/0x30
> 
> Fix it by setting 'ftrace_managed = true' in register_fentry_multi().
> 
> Fixes: aef4dfa790b2 ("bpf: Add bpf_trampoline_multi_attach/detach functions")
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> index 1a721fc4bef5..6eadf64f7ec9 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> @@ -1536,6 +1536,7 @@ static int register_fentry_multi(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, struct bpf_tramp_ima
>  	if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
>  		addr = ftrace_jmp_set(addr);
>  
> +	tr->func.ftrace_managed = true;

I wonder we could set tr->func.ftrace_managed early in bpf_trampoline_get,
but we could do that as follow up

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

thanks,
jirka


>  	ftrace_hash_add(data->reg, data->entry, ip, addr);
>  	tr->cur_image = im;
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 2.55.0
> 

Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Mark tracing_multi trampolines as ftrace managed

[Leon Hwang]

On 2026/7/11 06:15, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 10:47:33PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
>> Since tracing_multi link does not set ftrace_managed, it would fail to
>> release the tracing_multi link when attaching tracing_multi link and
>> then attaching fentry link.
>>
>> [    3.714215] WARNING: kernel/bpf/trampoline.c:1727 at bpf_trampoline_multi_detach+0x20b/0x240, CPU#1: test_progs/97
>> ...
>> [    3.733170]  bpf_tracing_multi_link_release+0x14/0x30
>> [    3.733890]  bpf_link_free+0x58/0x130
>> [    3.734414]  bpf_link_release+0x23/0x30
>>
>> Fix it by setting 'ftrace_managed = true' in register_fentry_multi().
>>
>> Fixes: aef4dfa790b2 ("bpf: Add bpf_trampoline_multi_attach/detach functions")
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
>> ---
>>  kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
>> index 1a721fc4bef5..6eadf64f7ec9 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
>> @@ -1536,6 +1536,7 @@ static int register_fentry_multi(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, struct bpf_tramp_ima
>>  	if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
>>  		addr = ftrace_jmp_set(addr);
>>  
>> +	tr->func.ftrace_managed = true;
> 
> I wonder we could set tr->func.ftrace_managed early in bpf_trampoline_get,
> but we could do that as follow up


Makes sense. Let me try it when adding tracing_multi link support for
bpf progs.

> 
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>


Thanks for your review.

Leon

> 
> thanks,
> jirka
> 
> 
>>  	ftrace_hash_add(data->reg, data->entry, ip, addr);
>>  	tr->cur_image = im;
>>  	return 0;
>> -- 
>> 2.55.0
>>

[PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test fentry link after tracing_multi link

[Leon Hwang]

Verify that there's no any issue to attach tracing_multi link, then attach
fentry link.

Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5.6-sol
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c  | 69 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c    |  8 +++
 2 files changed, 77 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c
index f02ffc7f41d7..0aa9532a05cf 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_multi.c
@@ -460,6 +460,73 @@ static void test_intersect(void)
 	tracing_multi_intersect__destroy(skel);
 }
 
+static void test_fentry_after_multi(void)
+{
+	static const char * const funcs[] = {
+		"bpf_fentry_test1",
+	};
+	struct bpf_link *fentry_link = NULL, *multi_link = NULL;
+	struct tracing_multi_intersect *skel = NULL;
+	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tracing_multi_opts, opts);
+	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, topts);
+	__u32 *ids = NULL;
+	int err;
+
+	skel = tracing_multi_intersect__open_and_load();
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "tracing_multi_intersect__open_and_load"))
+		return;
+
+	skel->bss->pid = getpid();
+
+	ids = get_ids(funcs, ARRAY_SIZE(funcs), NULL);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(ids, "get_ids"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	opts.ids = ids;
+	opts.cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(funcs);
+	multi_link = bpf_program__attach_tracing_multi(skel->progs.fentry_1, NULL, &opts);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(multi_link, "attach_multi"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	fentry_link = bpf_program__attach(skel->progs.fentry);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(fentry_link, "attach_fentry"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.fentry_1), &topts);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run"))
+		goto cleanup;
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry_1, 1, "multi_fentry");
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry, 1, "fentry");
+
+	err = bpf_link__destroy(fentry_link);
+	fentry_link = NULL;
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "destroy_fentry"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.fentry_1), &topts);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run_multi"))
+		goto cleanup;
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry_1, 2, "multi_fentry_only");
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry, 1, "fentry_detached");
+
+	err = bpf_link__destroy(multi_link);
+	multi_link = NULL;
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "destroy_multi"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.fentry_1), &topts);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run_detached"))
+		goto cleanup;
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry_1, 2, "multi_fentry_detached");
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_result_fentry, 1, "fentry_still_detached");
+
+cleanup:
+	bpf_link__destroy(fentry_link);
+	bpf_link__destroy(multi_link);
+	free(ids);
+	tracing_multi_intersect__destroy(skel);
+}
+
 static void test_session(void)
 {
 	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, topts);
@@ -957,4 +1024,6 @@ void test_tracing_multi_test(void)
 	if (test__start_subtest("attach_api_fails"))
 		test_attach_api_fails();
 	RUN_TESTS(tracing_multi_verifier);
+	if (test__start_subtest("fentry_after_multi"))
+		test_fentry_after_multi();
 }
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c
index cd5be0bb6ffd..5ebbe3b602a4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_intersect_attach.c
@@ -11,6 +11,14 @@ __u64 test_result_fentry_1 = 0;
 __u64 test_result_fentry_2 = 0;
 __u64 test_result_fexit_1 = 0;
 __u64 test_result_fexit_2 = 0;
+__u64 test_result_fentry = 0;
+
+SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test1")
+int BPF_PROG(fentry, int a)
+{
+	test_result_fentry += a == 1;
+	return 0;
+}
 
 SEC("fentry.multi")
 int BPF_PROG(fentry_1)
-- 
2.55.0