[PATCH v6 02/19] coresight: Set per-CPU source pointer
Leo Yan
leo.yan at arm.com
Mon Mar 16 12:30:37 PDT 2026
On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 05:49:47PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 16/03/2026 14:38, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 11:18:20AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > static struct coresight_device *coresight_get_source(struct coresight_path *path)
> > > > {
> > > > struct coresight_device *csdev;
> > > > @@ -1401,6 +1452,8 @@ struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc *desc)
> > > > mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
> > > > + coresight_set_percpu_source(csdev);
> > > > +
> > > > if (cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
> > > > cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
> > > > @@ -1427,6 +1480,7 @@ void coresight_unregister(struct coresight_device *csdev)
> > > > if (cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->remove)
> > > > cti_assoc_ops->remove(csdev);
> > > > + coresight_clear_percpu_source(csdev);
> > >
> > > Should these be done with the mutex lock held ?
> >
> > If so, we will create a locking chain:
> >
> > coresight_mutex -> cpus_read_lock()
> >
> > Afterwards in patch 18, it uses cpus_read_lock() to protect sysfs knobs,
> > a reversed locking chain will be established:
> >
> > cpus_read_lock() -> coresight_mutex
> >
> > LOCKDEP will complain for possible deadlock. This is why this patch
> > avoids to acquire mutex when set / clear per CPU sources.
>
> The question is, what prevents two different CPUs trying to modify the
> "per_cpu_source" data structure when the CPU is not online.
I am struggling to establish a flow for this scenario.
Each CPU has a unique per-CPU source, and the pointer is only modified
during device probe or remove. Both paths are protected by the device
lock (I confirmed that __device_attach() and
__device_release_driver() are protected by device_lock(dev)).
Therefore concurrent updates to the same source pointer should not
occur.
One possible corner case is the ETMv4 delayed probe (etm4_probe_cpu()).
Since the probe is deferred and coresight_register() is invoked when
a CPU is hotplugged, it could race with ETMv4 module unloading, i.e.
between etm4_probe_cpu() and etm4_remove_dev().
I discussed with James for another option before: we always access
per-cpu source pointer _locally_. For example, we could set the pointer
in etm4_init_arch_data() and clear it in clear_etmdrvdata(). These
paths are protected by the CPU lock and in SMP call, thus
coresight_set_percpu_source() does not need acquire any lock.
The downside is that we set the per-cpu source pointer in ETM driver but
cannot use coresight_register/coresight_unregister as common place to
manage the pointer.
Thanks,
Leo
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list