kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
If in perf_trace_event_init(), the perf_trace_event_open() fails, then it
will call perf_trace_event_unreg() which will not only unregister the perf
trace event, but will also call the put() function of the tp_event.
The problem here is that the trace_event_try_get_ref() is called by the
caller of perf_trace_event_init() and if perf_trace_event_init() returns a
failure, it will then call trace_event_put(). But since the
perf_trace_event_unreg() already called the trace_event_put() function, it
triggers a WARN_ON().
WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 30309 at kernel/trace/trace_dynevent.c:46 trace_event_dyn_put_ref+0x15/0x20
If perf_trace_event_reg() does not call the trace_event_try_get_ref() then
the perf_trace_event_unreg() should not be calling trace_event_put(). This
breaks symmetry and causes bugs like these.
Pull out the trace_event_put() from perf_trace_event_unreg() and call it
in the locations that perf_trace_event_unreg() is called. This not only
fixes this bug, but also brings back the proper symmetry of the reg/unreg
vs get/put logic.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1660347763.git.kjlx@templeofstupid.com/
Reported-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com>
Reviewed-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com>
Tested-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
index a114549720d6..61e3a2620fa3 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event)
int i;
if (--tp_event->perf_refcount > 0)
- goto out;
+ return;
tp_event->class->reg(tp_event, TRACE_REG_PERF_UNREGISTER, NULL);
@@ -176,8 +176,6 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event)
perf_trace_buf[i] = NULL;
}
}
-out:
- trace_event_put_ref(tp_event);
}
static int perf_trace_event_open(struct perf_event *p_event)
@@ -241,6 +239,7 @@ void perf_trace_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event)
mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
perf_trace_event_close(p_event);
perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event);
+ trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event);
mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
}
@@ -292,6 +291,7 @@ void perf_kprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event)
mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
perf_trace_event_close(p_event);
perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event);
+ trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event);
mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
destroy_local_trace_kprobe(p_event->tp_event);
@@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ void perf_uprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event)
mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
perf_trace_event_close(p_event);
perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event);
+ trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event);
mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
destroy_local_trace_uprobe(p_event->tp_event);
}
--
2.35.1
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 07:28:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org> > > If in perf_trace_event_init(), the perf_trace_event_open() fails, then it > will call perf_trace_event_unreg() which will not only unregister the perf > trace event, but will also call the put() function of the tp_event. > > The problem here is that the trace_event_try_get_ref() is called by the > caller of perf_trace_event_init() and if perf_trace_event_init() returns a > failure, it will then call trace_event_put(). But since the > perf_trace_event_unreg() already called the trace_event_put() function, it > triggers a WARN_ON(). > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 30309 at kernel/trace/trace_dynevent.c:46 trace_event_dyn_put_ref+0x15/0x20 > > If perf_trace_event_reg() does not call the trace_event_try_get_ref() then > the perf_trace_event_unreg() should not be calling trace_event_put(). This > breaks symmetry and causes bugs like these. > > Pull out the trace_event_put() from perf_trace_event_unreg() and call it > in the locations that perf_trace_event_unreg() is called. This not only > fixes this bug, but also brings back the proper symmetry of the reg/unreg > vs get/put logic. > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1660347763.git.kjlx@templeofstupid.com/ > > Reported-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Reviewed-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Tested-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org> LGTM Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> jirka > --- > kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > index a114549720d6..61e3a2620fa3 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event) > int i; > > if (--tp_event->perf_refcount > 0) > - goto out; > + return; > > tp_event->class->reg(tp_event, TRACE_REG_PERF_UNREGISTER, NULL); > > @@ -176,8 +176,6 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event) > perf_trace_buf[i] = NULL; > } > } > -out: > - trace_event_put_ref(tp_event); > } > > static int perf_trace_event_open(struct perf_event *p_event) > @@ -241,6 +239,7 @@ void perf_trace_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > } > > @@ -292,6 +291,7 @@ void perf_kprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > > destroy_local_trace_kprobe(p_event->tp_event); > @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ void perf_uprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > destroy_local_trace_uprobe(p_event->tp_event); > } > -- > 2.35.1 >
On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:16:02 +0200 Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote: > LGTM > > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> Thanks Jiri! -- Steve
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 07:28:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org> > > If in perf_trace_event_init(), the perf_trace_event_open() fails, then it > will call perf_trace_event_unreg() which will not only unregister the perf > trace event, but will also call the put() function of the tp_event. > > The problem here is that the trace_event_try_get_ref() is called by the > caller of perf_trace_event_init() and if perf_trace_event_init() returns a > failure, it will then call trace_event_put(). But since the > perf_trace_event_unreg() already called the trace_event_put() function, it > triggers a WARN_ON(). > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 30309 at kernel/trace/trace_dynevent.c:46 trace_event_dyn_put_ref+0x15/0x20 > > If perf_trace_event_reg() does not call the trace_event_try_get_ref() then > the perf_trace_event_unreg() should not be calling trace_event_put(). This > breaks symmetry and causes bugs like these. > > Pull out the trace_event_put() from perf_trace_event_unreg() and call it > in the locations that perf_trace_event_unreg() is called. This not only > fixes this bug, but also brings back the proper symmetry of the reg/unreg > vs get/put logic. > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1660347763.git.kjlx@templeofstupid.com/ > > Reported-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Reviewed-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Tested-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org> Thanks again, Steven. Is this one that you would consider tagging for a backport to stable at the appropriate time? I believe this one showed up in 5.15, if it's any help. -K > --- > kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > index a114549720d6..61e3a2620fa3 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event) > int i; > > if (--tp_event->perf_refcount > 0) > - goto out; > + return; > > tp_event->class->reg(tp_event, TRACE_REG_PERF_UNREGISTER, NULL); > > @@ -176,8 +176,6 @@ static void perf_trace_event_unreg(struct perf_event *p_event) > perf_trace_buf[i] = NULL; > } > } > -out: > - trace_event_put_ref(tp_event); > } > > static int perf_trace_event_open(struct perf_event *p_event) > @@ -241,6 +239,7 @@ void perf_trace_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > } > > @@ -292,6 +291,7 @@ void perf_kprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > > destroy_local_trace_kprobe(p_event->tp_event); > @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ void perf_uprobe_destroy(struct perf_event *p_event) > mutex_lock(&event_mutex); > perf_trace_event_close(p_event); > perf_trace_event_unreg(p_event); > + trace_event_put_ref(p_event->tp_event); > mutex_unlock(&event_mutex); > destroy_local_trace_uprobe(p_event->tp_event); > } > -- > 2.35.1 >
On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:46:56 -0700
Krister Johansen <kjlx@templeofstupid.com> wrote:
> Thanks again, Steven. Is this one that you would consider tagging for a
> backport to stable at the appropriate time? I believe this one showed up
> in 5.15, if it's any help.
So the warning started with this commit:
1d18538e6a092 ("tracing: Have dynamic events have a ref counter")
Which switched the module_put() to the trace_event_put(). I guess the
difference is that module_put() has
ret = atomic_dec_if_positive(&module->refcnt);
Where it could be called more than once after reaching zero and not warn
about it. But the trace_event_put() will warn if you call it after it
reaches zero.
I'll add a stable tag.
-- Steve
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.