Subject: perf,x86: Fix active_events imbalance

Commit 1b7b938f1817 ("perf/x86/intel: Fix PMI handling for Intel PT")
conditionally increments active_events in x86_add_exclusive() but
unconditionally decrements in x86_del_exclusive().

These extra decrements can lead to the situation where active_events is
zero and thus the PMI handler is 'disabled' while we have active events
on the PMU generating PMIs.

This leads to a truckload of:

  Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 21 on CPU 28.
  Do you have a strange power saving mode enabled?
  Dazed and confused, but trying to continue

messages and generally messes up perf.

Remove the condition on the increment, double increment balanced by a
double decrement is perfectly fine.

Restructure the code a little bit to make the unconditional inc a bit
more natural.

Fixes: 1b7b938f1817 ("perf/x86/intel: Fix PMI handling for Intel PT")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c |   36 +++++++++++++-----------------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
index 5801a14..3658de4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
@@ -357,34 +357,24 @@ void x86_release_hardware(void)
  */
 int x86_add_exclusive(unsigned int what)
 {
-       int ret = -EBUSY, i;
-
-       if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[what]))
-               return 0;
+       int i;
 
-       mutex_lock(&pmc_reserve_mutex);
-       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive); i++) {
-               if (i != what && atomic_read(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[i]))
-                       goto out;
+       if (!atomic_inc_not_zero(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[what])) {
+               mutex_lock(&pmc_reserve_mutex);
+               for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive); i++) {
+                       if (i != what && atomic_read(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[i]))
+                               goto fail_unlock;
+               }
+               atomic_inc(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[what]);
+               mutex_unlock(&pmc_reserve_mutex);
        }
 
-       atomic_inc(&x86_pmu.lbr_exclusive[what]);
-       ret = 0;
+       atomic_inc(&active_events);
+       return 0;
 
-out:
+fail_unlock:
        mutex_unlock(&pmc_reserve_mutex);
-
-       /*
-        * Assuming that all exclusive events will share the PMI handler
-        * (which checks active_events for whether there is work to do),
-        * we can bump active_events counter right here, except for
-        * x86_lbr_exclusive_lbr events that go through x86_pmu_event_init()
-        * path, which already bumps active_events for them.
-        */
-       if (!ret && what != x86_lbr_exclusive_lbr)
-               atomic_inc(&active_events);
-
-       return ret;
+       return -EBUSY;
 }
 
 void x86_del_exclusive(unsigned int what)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to