Commit e1ac3614 authored by Paul Mackerras's avatar Paul Mackerras Committed by Ingo Molnar

perf_counter: Check task on counter read IPI

In general, code in perf_counter.c that is called through an
IPI checks, for per-task counters, that the counter's task is
still the current task.  This is to handle the race condition
where the cpu switches from the task we want to another task in
the interval between sending the IPI and the IPI arriving and
being handled on the target CPU.

For some reason, __perf_counter_read is missing this check, yet
there is no reason why the race condition can't occur.  This
adds a check that the current task is the one we want.  If it
isn't, we just return.  In that case the counter->count value
should be up to date, since it will have been updated when the
counter was scheduled out, which must have happened since the
IPI was sent.

I don't have an example of an actual failure due to this race,
but it seems obvious that it could occur and we need to guard
against it.
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Acked-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
LKML-Reference: <19076.63614.277861.368125@drongo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
parent 2932cffc
......@@ -1503,10 +1503,21 @@ static void perf_counter_enable_on_exec(struct task_struct *task)
*/
static void __perf_counter_read(void *info)
{
struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx = &__get_cpu_var(perf_cpu_context);
struct perf_counter *counter = info;
struct perf_counter_context *ctx = counter->ctx;
unsigned long flags;
/*
* If this is a task context, we need to check whether it is
* the current task context of this cpu. If not it has been
* scheduled out before the smp call arrived. In that case
* counter->count would have been updated to a recent sample
* when the counter was scheduled out.
*/
if (ctx->task && cpuctx->task_ctx != ctx)
return;
local_irq_save(flags);
if (ctx->is_active)
update_context_time(ctx);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment