Re: [RFC PATCH] ARM, ARM64, LOONGARCH: Delay HW BP notification to task_work()
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <[email protected]> Wed, 29 Jul 2026 22:14:14 -0300
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.linux-rt-devel,dev.linux.lists.loongarch,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 04:49:39PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Waiman, Luis, Ada reported that HW breakpoints on ARM64 trigger > "sleeping while atomic" warnings on PREEMPT_RT. The hardware event is > delivered with disabled interrupts and perf intrastrucure expects > disabled interrupts while the overflow callback is invoked. > > The callback then sends a SIGTRAP signal for which it acquires > sighand_struct::siglock, a spinlock_t which becomes a sleeping lock and > must not be acquired in atomic context. > > Delay the event callback until the return to userland. > Add perf_arch_hwbp_notify(), a generic perf callback which delayes the > actual callback invocation to task_work_add() callback. This callback > invokes the architecture defines callback arch_hwbp_send_sig(). > This requires struct callback_head and the functions require > ARCH_NEED_PERF_HW_NOTIF to be defined. > > This was reported against ARM64. ARM and LongARCH follow the same > pattern are also converted. > > Reported-by: Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <[email protected]> > Reported-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]> > --- > > This is approximately the fifth iteration at which point I think I can > share what I have. > > Could this be tested, please? I tested it on arm64 for arm64 based on > Luis' test. ARM compiles my HW lacks support for this I think (gdb > aborts early). I hope the best for LoongARCH. I tested your patch on baremetal (3 different aarch64 machines) and 3 different Virtual Machines. Apart from the one VM that didn't provide the HW breakpoints the test used, I was able to reproduce the problem with v7.2-rc5-rt3 and earlier kernels in all the other setups. Applying your patch eliminated the backtraces. I ran several batches of 2000 and 10000 executions in a row of the gdb test from the original thread without a glitch. Having DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP enabled in the kernel (along with PREEMPT_RT) was all I needed to reproduce the problem with the unpatched kernel. After I applied the patch I run tests with and without lockdep. No backtrace, no complaints. I started working on trying to reproduce the (possible) problem Sashiko highlighted, but so far, no luck in reproducing that specific scenario. Best regards, Luis