[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240409105405.TXUU--_W@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 12:54:05 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] perf: Remove perf_swevent_get_recursion_context()
from perf_pending_task().
On 2024-04-09 12:35:46 [+0200], Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > @@ -6800,10 +6792,6 @@ static void perf_pending_task(struct callback_head *head)
> > > > local_dec(&event->ctx->nr_pending);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - if (rctx >= 0)
> > > > - perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(rctx);
> > > > - preempt_enable_notrace();
> > >
> > > Well, if a software event happens during perf_sigtrap(), the task work
> > > may be requeued endlessly and the task may get stuck in task_work_run()...
> >
> > The last time I checked it had no users in the task context. How would
> > that happen?
>
> I guess many tracepoint events would do the trick. Such as trace_lock_acquire()
> for example.
So the perf_trace_buf_alloc() is invoked from that trace point and
avoids the recursion. And any trace event from within perf_sigtrap()
would trigger the endless loop?
> Thanks.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists