Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757323AbcCCJXs (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2016 04:23:48 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:44209 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756716AbcCCJXq (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2016 04:23:46 -0500 Message-ID: <1456997018.335.7.camel@ellerman.id.au> Subject: Re: hw_breakpoint: Fix Oops at destroying hw_breakpoint event on powerpc From: Michael Ellerman To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ravi Bangoria , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acme@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, paulus@samba.org Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 20:23:38 +1100 In-Reply-To: <20160302115942.GC6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1456912517-5711-1-git-send-email-ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160302115324.63B35140BF5@ozlabs.org> <20160302115942.GC6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.16.5-1ubuntu3.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1792 Lines: 47 On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 12:59 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:53:24PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Peterz, acme, do you guys want to take this? Or should I? > > I'm not too happy its touching event->ctx at all. It really should not > be doing that. Hmm OK. It's been using ctx->task since it was merged in 2010. In fact that commit also added arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint(), and we're still the only user of that. The prima facie reason it's using ctx is to get at task->thread to clear last_hit_ubp. It looks like other arches avoid needing to do something similar by storing the break point in a per-cpu array. Which I guess is what you meant in your other mail ("Why do you keep per task state anyway?"). I can't think of a reason why we can't also store it per-cpu, but I could be wrong, I don't know the code well and I haven't thought about it for very long. Do you mind if I merge the following fix for now as a band-aid, and we'll try and fix it up properly in the next few weeks (but maybe not in time for 4.5 final). cheers diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c index 05e804cdecaa..aec9a1b1d25b 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c @@ -109,8 +109,9 @@ void arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp) * If the breakpoint is unregistered between a hw_breakpoint_handler() * and the single_step_dabr_instruction(), then cleanup the breakpoint * restoration variables to prevent dangling pointers. + * FIXME, this should not be using bp->ctx at all! Sayeth peterz. */ - if (bp->ctx && bp->ctx->task) + if (bp->ctx && bp->ctx->task && bp->ctx->task != ((void *)-1L)) bp->ctx->task->thread.last_hit_ubp = NULL; }