linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 12/13] perf record: implement control commands handling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 24 Jun 2020 17:55:02 +0300
From:   Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 12/13] perf record: implement control commands handling


On 24.06.2020 17:00, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> 
> On 23.06.2020 17:54, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:43:58AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
>>>
>>> Implement handling of 'enable' and 'disable' control commands
>>> coming from control file descriptor.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>  tools/perf/builtin-record.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
>>> index d0b29a1070a0..0394e068dde8 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
>>> @@ -1527,6 +1527,7 @@ static int __cmd_record(struct record *rec, int argc, const char **argv)
>>>  	bool disabled = false, draining = false;
>>>  	int fd;
>>>  	float ratio = 0;
>>> +	enum evlist_ctl_cmd cmd = EVLIST_CTL_CMD_UNSUPPORTED;
>>>  
>>>  	atexit(record__sig_exit);
>>>  	signal(SIGCHLD, sig_handler);
>>> @@ -1830,6 +1831,21 @@ static int __cmd_record(struct record *rec, int argc, const char **argv)
>>>  				alarm(rec->switch_output.time);
>>>  		}
>>>  
>>> +		if (evlist__ctlfd_process(rec->evlist, &cmd) > 0) {
>>> +			switch (cmd) {
>>> +			case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_ENABLE:
>>> +				pr_info(EVLIST_ENABLED_MSG);
>>> +				break;
>>> +			case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_DISABLE:
>>> +				pr_info(EVLIST_DISABLED_MSG);
>>> +				break;
>>> +			case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_ACK:
>>> +			case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_UNSUPPORTED:
>>> +			default:
>>> +				break;
>>> +			}
>>> +		}
>>
>> so there's still the filter call like:
>>
>>                         if (evlist__filter_pollfd(rec->evlist, POLLERR | POLLHUP) == 0)
>>                                 draining = true;
>>
>> it will never be 0 if the control fds are stil alive no?
> 
> Due to change in filter_pollfd() and preceding evlist__ctlfd_process() call
> now control fd is not counted by filter_pollfd().
And evlist__ctlfd_process() still should be called second time right
after evlist_poll() but prior filter_polfd().

~Alexey

> 
> However event fds with .revents == 0 are not counted either and this breaks
> the algorithm thus something more is still required to cover this gap.
> 
> ~Alexey
> 
>>
>> jirka
>>