[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <38ea48b4-aaba-4ba4-84a1-e88d6cb9df94@amd.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:32:27 -0500
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@....com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
pavel@....cz, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86/amd: Don't allow pre-emption in
amd_pmu_lbr_reset()
On 10/24/2023 03:02, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com> wrote:
>
>> Fixes a BUG reported during suspend to ram testing.
>>
>> ```
>> [ 478.274752] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: rtcwake/2948
>> [ 478.274754] caller is amd_pmu_lbr_reset+0x19/0xc0
>> ```
>>
>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 6.1+
>> Fixes: ca5b7c0d9621 ("perf/x86/amd/lbr: Add LbrExtV2 branch record support")
>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
>> index eb31f850841a..5b98e8c7d8b7 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/amd/lbr.c
>> @@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ int amd_pmu_lbr_hw_config(struct perf_event *event)
>>
>> void amd_pmu_lbr_reset(void)
>> {
>> - struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>> + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = get_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>> int i;
>>
>> if (!x86_pmu.lbr_nr)
>> @@ -335,6 +335,7 @@ void amd_pmu_lbr_reset(void)
>>
>> cpuc->last_task_ctx = NULL;
>> cpuc->last_log_id = 0;
>> + put_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>> wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_LBR_SELECT, 0);
>> }
>
> Weird, amd_pmu_lbr_reset() is called from these places:
>
> - amd_pmu_lbr_sched_task(): during task sched-in during
> context-switching, this should already have preemption disabled.
>
> - amd_pmu_lbr_add(): this gets indirectly called by amd_pmu::add
> (amd_pmu_add_event()), called by event_sched_in(), which too should have
> preemption disabled.
>
> I clearly must have missed some additional place it gets called in.
>
> Could you please cite the full log of the amd_pmu_lbr_reset() call that
> caused the critical section warning?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
Below is the call trace in case you think it's better to disable
preemption by the caller instead. If you think it's better to keep it
in amd_pmu_lbr_reset() I'll add this trace to the commit message.
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x60
check_preemption_disabled+0xce/0xf0
? __pfx_x86_pmu_dead_cpu+0x10/0x10
amd_pmu_lbr_reset+0x19/0xc0
? __pfx_x86_pmu_dead_cpu+0x10/0x10
amd_pmu_cpu_reset.constprop.0+0x51/0x60
amd_pmu_cpu_dead+0x3e/0x90
x86_pmu_dead_cpu+0x13/0x20
cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x169/0x4b0
? __pfx_virtnet_cpu_dead+0x10/0x10
__cpuhp_invoke_callback_range+0x76/0xe0
_cpu_down+0x112/0x270
freeze_secondary_cpus+0x8e/0x280
suspend_devices_and_enter+0x342/0x900
pm_suspend+0x2fd/0x690
state_store+0x71/0xd0
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x128/0x1c0
vfs_write+0x2db/0x400
ksys_write+0x5f/0xe0
do_syscall_64+0x59/0x90
Powered by blists - more mailing lists