| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPqJEFpV8a8D7eA0sspjvThvBxdZhSLPTEbEzN7WiGCAzSnYYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 17:08:07 +0800
From: Eric Lin <eric.lin@...ive.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
namhyung@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
palmer@...belt.com, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
greentime.hu@...ive.com, vincent.chen@...ive.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/core: Add pmu stop before unthrottling to prevent WARNING
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 01:58:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:18:05PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 9:25 PM Eric Lin <eric.lin@...ive.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > CC: Stephane Eranian
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 5:49 PM Eric Lin <eric.lin@...ive.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Currently, during the perf sampling, if the perf interrupt takes too long,
> > > > perf framework will lower the perf_event_max_sample_rate. This will limit
> > > > the number of samples per timer tick (max_samples_per_tick) and set hwc->interrupts
> > > > to MAX_INTERRUPTS within the __perf_event_account_interrupt() function.
> > > >
> > > > Afterward, the perf framework will unthrottle the event in the timer interrupt
> > > > handler, which triggers the driver's *_pmu_start() function. Most of the driver's
> > > > *_pmu_start() functions will check the event->hw.state to determine whether this
> > > > event has stopped. If the event has not stopped, a WARN_ON_ONCE() warning
> > > > will be triggered as shown below:
> > > >
> > > > [ 2110.224723] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > > [ 2110.224851] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 240 at drivers/perf/riscv_pmu.c:184 riscv_pmu_start+0x7c/0x8e
> > > > [ 2110.225242] Modules linked in:
> > > > [ 2110.225380] CPU: 0 PID: 240 Comm: ls Not tainted 6.4-rc4-g19d0788e9ef2 #1
> > > > [ 2110.225574] Hardware name: SiFive (DT)
> > > > [ 2110.225657] epc : riscv_pmu_start+0x7c/0x8e
> > > > [ 2110.225834] ra : riscv_pmu_start+0x28/0x8e
> > > > [ 2110.225998] epc : ffffffff80aef864 ra : ffffffff80aef810 sp : ffff8f80004db6f0
> > > > [ 2110.226135] gp : ffffffff81c83750 tp : ffffaf80069f9bc0 t0 : ffff8f80004db6c0
> > > > [ 2110.226245] t1 : 0000000000000000 t2 : 000000000000001f s0 : ffff8f80004db720
> > > > [ 2110.226367] s1 : ffffaf8008ca1068 a0 : 0000ffffffffffff a1 : 0000000000000000
> > > > [ 2110.226488] a2 : 0000000000000001 a3 : 0000000000000870 a4 : 0000000000000000
> > > > [ 2110.226605] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000840 a7 : 0000000000000030
> > > > [ 2110.226721] s2 : 0000000000000000 s3 : ffffaf8005165800 s4 : ffffaf800424da00
> > > > [ 2110.226838] s5 : ffffffffffffffff s6 : ffffffff81cc7590 s7 : 0000000000000000
> > > > [ 2110.226955] s8 : 0000000000000006 s9 : 0000000000000001 s10: ffffaf807efbc340
> > > > [ 2110.227064] s11: ffffaf807efbbf00 t3 : ffffaf8006a16028 t4 : 00000000dbfbb796
> > > > [ 2110.227180] t5 : 0000000700000000 t6 : ffffaf8005269870
> > > > [ 2110.227277] status: 0000000200000100 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000003
> > > > [ 2110.227407] [<ffffffff80aef864>] riscv_pmu_start+0x7c/0x8e
> > > > [ 2110.227622] [<ffffffff80185b56>] perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context+0x15e/0x174
> > > > [ 2110.227961] [<ffffffff80188642>] perf_event_task_tick+0x88/0x9c
> > > > [ 2110.228235] [<ffffffff800626a8>] scheduler_tick+0xfe/0x27c
> > > > [ 2110.228463] [<ffffffff800b5640>] update_process_times+0x9a/0xba
> > > > [ 2110.228690] [<ffffffff800c5bd4>] tick_sched_handle+0x32/0x66
> > > > [ 2110.229007] [<ffffffff800c5e0c>] tick_sched_timer+0x64/0xb0
> > > > [ 2110.229253] [<ffffffff800b5e50>] __hrtimer_run_queues+0x156/0x2f4
> > > > [ 2110.229446] [<ffffffff800b6bdc>] hrtimer_interrupt+0xe2/0x1fe
> > > > [ 2110.229637] [<ffffffff80acc9e8>] riscv_timer_interrupt+0x38/0x42
> > > > [ 2110.229984] [<ffffffff80090a16>] handle_percpu_devid_irq+0x90/0x1d2
> > > > [ 2110.230162] [<ffffffff8008a9f4>] generic_handle_domain_irq+0x28/0x36
> > > >
> > > > To prevent this warning, we should call the driver's *_pmu_stop() function before unthrottling
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Lin <eric.lin@...ive.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > kernel/events/core.c | 1 +
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> > > > index db016e418931..098c875abe88 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> > > > @@ -4128,6 +4128,7 @@ perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> > > >
> > > > if (hwc->interrupts == MAX_INTERRUPTS) {
> > > > hwc->interrupts = 0;
> > > > + event->pmu->stop(event, 0);
> >
> > But how could the event have been stopped with a call to pmu->stop()
> > during throttling?
>
> Yeah, Changelog fails to explain how we got to the faulty state -- and
> without that we can't judge if the proposed solution actually fixes the
> problem or not.
>
Hi Stephane, Peter,
Most of the pmu driver will call *_pmu_stop(event,0) in the
*_pmu_handle_irq() function and update the hwc->state with
PERF_HES_STOPPED flag as below:
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c:856: if
(perf_event_overflow(event, &data, regs)) {
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c-857- /* Interrupts
coming too quickly; "throttle" the
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c-858- * counter,
i.e., disable it for a little while.
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c-859- */
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c-860-
alpha_pmu_stop(event, 0);
arch/alpha/kernel/perf_event.c-861- }
-----
arch/arc/kernel/perf_event.c:603: if
(perf_event_overflow(event, &data, regs))
arch/arc/kernel/perf_event.c-604-
arc_pmu_stop(event, 0);
arch/arc/kernel/perf_event.c-605- }
-----
arch/x86/events/amd/core.c:935: if (perf_event_overflow(event,
&data, regs))
arch/x86/events/amd/core.c-936- x86_pmu_stop(event, 0);
arch/x86/events/amd/core.c-937- }
-----
However, some of the pmu drivers stop the event in the
*_pmu_handle_irq() without updating the hwc->state with
PERF_HES_STOPPED flag as below:
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c:994: if
(perf_event_overflow(event, &data, regs))
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c-995-
cpu_pmu->disable(event); // <== not update with PERF_HES_STOPPED
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c-996- }
------
arch/csky/kernel/perf_event.c:1142: if
(perf_event_overflow(event, &data, regs))
arch/csky/kernel/perf_event.c-1143-
csky_pmu_stop_event(event); // <== not update with PERF_HES_STOPPED
arch/csky/kernel/perf_event.c-1144- }
-------
arch/loongarch/kernel/perf_event.c:492: if (perf_event_overflow(event,
data, regs))
arch/loongarch/kernel/perf_event.c-493-
loongarch_pmu_disable_event(idx); // <== not update with
PERF_HES_STOPPED
arch/loongarch/kernel/perf_event.c-494-}
-------
arch/mips/kernel/perf_event_mipsxx.c:794: if
(perf_event_overflow(event, data, regs))
arch/mips/kernel/perf_event_mipsxx.c-795-
mipsxx_pmu_disable_event(idx); // <== not update with PERF_HES_STOPPED
arch/mips/kernel/perf_event_mipsxx.c-796-}
....
Furthermore, these drivers did not add event->hw.state checking in
*_pmu_start() before starting the event like x86 does:
1497 static void x86_pmu_start(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
1498 {
1499 struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
1500 int idx = event->hw.idx;
1501
1502 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!(event->hw.state & PERF_HES_STOPPED)))
1503 return;
1504
As a result, these drivers won't trigger the WARN_ON_ONCE warning as
shown in this patch.
However, if a pmu driver like RISC-V pmu which didn't call
*_pmu_stop(event,0) without updating the hwc->state with
PERF_HES_STOPPED flag in the *_pmu_handle_irq() function
but has event->hw.state checking in *_pmu_start(), it could trigger
the WARN_ON_ONCE warning as shown in this patch.
Therefore, I think we need to call pmu->stop() before unthrottling the
event to prevent this warning.
Or maybe we can add hwc->state checking before we call pmu->stop() as below:
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -4128,7 +4128,8 @@ perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct
perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
if (hwc->interrupts == MAX_INTERRUPTS) {
hwc->interrupts = 0;
- event->pmu->stop(event, 0);
+ if (!(hwc->state & PERF_HES_STOPPED))
+ event->pmu->stop(event, 0);
perf_log_throttle(event, 1);
event->pmu->start(event, 0);
}
Thanks.
Best Regards,
Eric Lin.
> > >
> > > > perf_log_throttle(event, 1);
> > > > event->pmu->start(event, 0);
> > > > }
> > > > --
> > > > 2.17.1
> > > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists