linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 26/57] perf: Simplify event

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cjz4cnEgV_oAnTOqyCWXDeD3ECYQFc=Uksct2-HKuFmiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2023 22:56:06 -0700
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
        nicolas@...sle.eu, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        vkoul@...nel.org, trix@...hat.com, ojeda@...nel.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        dennis@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, cl@...ux.com, acme@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
        mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
        paulmck@...nel.org, frederic@...nel.org, quic_neeraju@...cinc.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        rientjes@...gle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
        42.hyeyoo@...il.com, apw@...onical.com, joe@...ches.com,
        dwaipayanray1@...il.com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
        jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, ravi.bangoria@....com, error27@...il.com,
        luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 26/57] perf: Simplify event_function*()

Hi Peter,

On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 2:39 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> Use guards to reduce gotos and simplify control flow.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> ---
>  kernel/events/core.c |   39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -214,6 +214,25 @@ struct event_function_struct {
>         void *data;
>  };
>
> +typedef struct {
> +       struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx;
> +       struct perf_event_context *ctx;
> +} class_perf_ctx_lock_t;
> +
> +static inline void class_perf_ctx_lock_destructor(class_perf_ctx_lock_t *_T)
> +{
> +       if (_T->cpuctx)
> +               perf_ctx_unlock(_T->cpuctx, _T->ctx);

Shouldn't it be called unconditionally?

Thanks,
Namhyung

> +}
> +
> +static inline class_perf_ctx_lock_t
> +class_perf_ctx_lock_constructor(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx,
> +                               struct perf_event_context *ctx)
> +{
> +       perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, ctx);
> +       return (class_perf_ctx_lock_t){ cpuctx, ctx };
> +}
> +
>  static int event_function(void *info)
>  {
>         struct event_function_struct *efs = info;
> @@ -224,17 +243,15 @@ static int event_function(void *info)
>         int ret = 0;
>
>         lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> +       guard(perf_ctx_lock)(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>
> -       perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>         /*
>          * Since we do the IPI call without holding ctx->lock things can have
>          * changed, double check we hit the task we set out to hit.
>          */
>         if (ctx->task) {
> -               if (ctx->task != current) {
> -                       ret = -ESRCH;
> -                       goto unlock;
> -               }
> +               if (ctx->task != current)
> +                       return -ESRCH;
>
>                 /*
>                  * We only use event_function_call() on established contexts,
> @@ -254,8 +271,6 @@ static int event_function(void *info)
>         }
>
>         efs->func(event, cpuctx, ctx, efs->data);
> -unlock:
> -       perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>
>         return ret;
>  }
> @@ -329,11 +344,11 @@ static void event_function_local(struct
>                 task_ctx = ctx;
>         }
>
> -       perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
> +       guard(perf_ctx_lock)(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>
>         task = ctx->task;
>         if (task == TASK_TOMBSTONE)
> -               goto unlock;
> +               return;
>
>         if (task) {
>                 /*
> @@ -343,18 +358,16 @@ static void event_function_local(struct
>                  */
>                 if (ctx->is_active) {
>                         if (WARN_ON_ONCE(task != current))
> -                               goto unlock;
> +                               return;
>
>                         if (WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->task_ctx != ctx))
> -                               goto unlock;
> +                               return;
>                 }
>         } else {
>                 WARN_ON_ONCE(&cpuctx->ctx != ctx);
>         }
>
>         func(event, cpuctx, ctx, data);
> -unlock:
> -       perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>  }
>
>  #define PERF_FLAG_ALL (PERF_FLAG_FD_NO_GROUP |\
>
>