On 8/4/25 6:02 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 08:16:15PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
The syscall link_create not protected by bpf_disable_instrumentation,
accessing percpu data bpf_prog_active should use cpu local_lock when
kprobe_multi program attach.
Fixes: 0dcac2725406 ("bpf: Add multi kprobe link")
Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@xxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index 3ae52978cae..f6762552e8e 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -2728,23 +2728,23 @@ kprobe_multi_link_prog_run(struct bpf_kprobe_multi_link *link,
struct pt_regs *regs;
int err;
+ migrate_disable();
if (unlikely(__this_cpu_inc_return(bpf_prog_active) != 1)) {
this is called all the way from graph tracer, which disables preemption in
function_graph_enter_regs, so I think we can safely use __this_cpu_inc_return
Agree. migrate_disable() is not needed here. But it would be great to add some
comments here since for most other prog_run, they typically have migrate_disable/enable.
bpf_prog_inc_misses_counter(link->link.prog);
err = 1;
goto out;
}
- migrate_disable();
hum, but now I'm not sure why we disable migration in here then
Probably a oversight.
jirka
rcu_read_lock();
regs = ftrace_partial_regs(fregs, bpf_kprobe_multi_pt_regs_ptr());
old_run_ctx = bpf_set_run_ctx(&run_ctx.session_ctx.run_ctx);
err = bpf_prog_run(link->link.prog, regs);
bpf_reset_run_ctx(old_run_ctx);
rcu_read_unlock();
- migrate_enable();
out:
__this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
+ migrate_enable();
return err;
}
--
2.48.1
