linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/24] perf daemon: Add config file support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YCW1EtGBtcLbcj1V@krava>
Date:   Thu, 11 Feb 2021 23:52:02 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Alexei Budankov <abudankov@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/24] perf daemon: Add config file support

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 02:10:48PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 05:45:38PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 03:01:12PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > Hi Jiri,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:09 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > +static int daemon__reconfig(struct daemon *daemon)
> > > > +{
> > > > +       struct daemon_session *session, *n;
> > > > +
> > > > +       list_for_each_entry_safe(session, n, &daemon->sessions, list) {
> > > > +               /* No change. */
> > > > +               if (session->state == OK)
> > > > +                       continue;
> > > > +
> > > > +               /* Remove session. */
> > > > +               if (session->state == KILL) {
> > > > +                       if (session->pid > 0) {
> > > > +                               daemon_session__kill(session);
> > > > +                               pr_info("reconfig: session '%s' killed\n", session->name);
> > > > +                       }
> > > > +                       daemon_session__remove(session);
> > > > +                       continue;
> > > > +               }
> > > > +
> > > > +               /* Reconfig session. */
> > > > +               if (session->pid > 0) {
> > > > +                       daemon_session__kill(session);
> > > > +                       pr_info("reconfig: session '%s' killed\n", session->name);
> > > > +               }
> > > > +               if (daemon_session__run(session, daemon))
> > > > +                       return -1;
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't it be 'continue'?  If there's a problematic session
> > > it'll prevent others from being processed.  And it seems this
> > > code will try to run it again and again.  Maybe we can put it
> > > in the KILL state (or a new FAILED state) IMHO.
> > 
> > so if there is misconfigured session, it will get executed,
> > and then we catch that it exited, like:
> > 
> > 	# ./perf daemon start -f
> > 	[2021-02-11 17:38:19.718166] daemon started (pid 1167439)
> > 	[2021-02-11 17:38:19.719757] reconfig: ruining session [cycles:1167440]: abc -m 10M -e cycles --overwrite --switch-output -a
> > 	[2021-02-11 17:38:19.720861] reconfig: ruining session [sched:1167441]: -m 20M -e sched:* --overwrite --switch-output -a
> > 	[2021-02-11 17:38:21.132511] session 'cycles' exited, status=255
> > 
> > session will be removed
> > 
> > when the config is fixed and updated, daemon will pick it up:
> > 
> > 	[2021-02-11 17:42:59.241140] reconfig: ruining session [cycles:1167642]: -m 10M -e cycles --overwrite --switch-output -a
> > 
> > 
> > daemon_session__run fails only there's no memory for allocation,
> > if mkdir fails (for other error than EEXIST) and if fork fails,
> > so pretty serious errors, where we want to bail out anyway
> 
> I know you love documentation, that is why I think that it would be a
> good idea to have these questions and answers in a FAQ for 'perf
> daemon', don't you think? ;-)

heh, sure.. I can add something like that as section to perf-daemon man page

jirka