On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:28 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On May 31, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Matt Mullins <mmullins@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > It is possible that a BPF program can be called while another BPF > > program is executing bpf_perf_event_output. This has been observed with > > I/O completion occurring as a result of an interrupt: > > > > bpf_prog_247fd1341cddaea4_trace_req_end+0x8d7/0x1000 > > ? trace_call_bpf+0x82/0x100 > > ? sch_direct_xmit+0xe2/0x230 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x1/0x100 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x5/0x100 > > ? kprobe_perf_func+0x19b/0x240 > > ? __qdisc_run+0x86/0x520 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x1/0x100 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x5/0x100 > > ? kprobe_ftrace_handler+0x90/0xf0 > > ? ftrace_ops_assist_func+0x6e/0xe0 > > ? ip6_input_finish+0xbf/0x460 > > ? 0xffffffffa01e80bf > > ? nbd_dbg_flags_show+0xc0/0xc0 [nbd] > > ? blkdev_issue_zeroout+0x200/0x200 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x1/0x100 > > ? blk_mq_end_request+0x5/0x100 > > ? flush_smp_call_function_queue+0x6c/0xe0 > > ? smp_call_function_single_interrupt+0x32/0xc0 > > ? call_function_single_interrupt+0xf/0x20 > > ? call_function_single_interrupt+0xa/0x20 > > ? swiotlb_map_page+0x140/0x140 > > ? refcount_sub_and_test+0x1a/0x50 > > ? tcp_wfree+0x20/0xf0 > > ? skb_release_head_state+0x62/0xc0 > > ? skb_release_all+0xe/0x30 > > ? napi_consume_skb+0xb5/0x100 > > ? mlx5e_poll_tx_cq+0x1df/0x4e0 > > ? mlx5e_poll_tx_cq+0x38c/0x4e0 > > ? mlx5e_napi_poll+0x58/0xc30 > > ? mlx5e_napi_poll+0x232/0xc30 > > ? net_rx_action+0x128/0x340 > > ? __do_softirq+0xd4/0x2ad > > ? irq_exit+0xa5/0xb0 > > ? do_IRQ+0x7d/0xc0 > > ? common_interrupt+0xf/0xf > > </IRQ> > > ? __rb_free_aux+0xf0/0xf0 > > ? perf_output_sample+0x28/0x7b0 > > ? perf_prepare_sample+0x54/0x4a0 > > ? perf_event_output+0x43/0x60 > > ? bpf_perf_event_output_raw_tp+0x15f/0x180 > > ? blk_mq_start_request+0x1/0x120 > > ? bpf_prog_411a64a706fc6044_should_trace+0xad4/0x1000 > > ? bpf_trace_run3+0x2c/0x80 > > ? nbd_send_cmd+0x4c2/0x690 [nbd] > > > > This also cannot be alleviated by further splitting the per-cpu > > perf_sample_data structs (as in commit 283ca526a9bd ("bpf: fix > > corruption on concurrent perf_event_output calls")), as a raw_tp could > > be attached to the block:block_rq_complete tracepoint and execute during > > another raw_tp. Instead, keep a pre-allocated perf_sample_data > > structure per perf_event_array element and fail a bpf_perf_event_output > > if that element is concurrently being used. > > > > Fixes: 20b9d7ac4852 ("bpf: avoid excessive stack usage for perf_sample_data") > > Signed-off-by: Matt Mullins <mmullins@xxxxxx> > > This looks great. Thanks for the fix. > > Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> > > > --- > > v1->v2: > > keep a pointer to the struct perf_sample_data rather than directly > > embedding it in the structure, avoiding the circular include and > > removing the need for in_use. Suggested by Song. > > > > include/linux/bpf.h | 1 + > > kernel/bpf/arraymap.c | 3 ++- > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++------------- > > 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h > > index 4fb3aa2dc975..47fd85cfbbaf 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h > > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h > > @@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ struct bpf_event_entry { > > struct file *perf_file; > > struct file *map_file; > > struct rcu_head rcu; > > + struct perf_sample_data *sd; > > }; > > > > bool bpf_prog_array_compatible(struct bpf_array *array, const struct bpf_prog *fp); > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c > > index 584636c9e2eb..c7f5d593e04f 100644 > > --- a/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/arraymap.c > > @@ -654,11 +654,12 @@ static struct bpf_event_entry *bpf_event_entry_gen(struct file *perf_file, > > { > > struct bpf_event_entry *ee; > > > > - ee = kzalloc(sizeof(*ee), GFP_ATOMIC); > > + ee = kzalloc(sizeof(*ee) + sizeof(struct perf_sample_data), GFP_ATOMIC); > > if (ee) { > > ee->event = perf_file->private_data; > > ee->perf_file = perf_file; > > ee->map_file = map_file; > > + ee->sd = (void *)ee + sizeof(*ee); This bit looks quite weird, but I don't have better ideas to avoid circular .h pain. Applied to bpf tree. Thanks