[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YLY0INyDtfjgVrXv@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 15:20:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: mhiramat@...nel.org, ananth@...ux.ibm.com,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kprobes: Do not increment probe miss count in the fault
handler
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 05:31:50PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> Kprobes has a counter 'nmissed', that is used to count the number of
> times a probe handler was not called. This generally happens when we hit
> a kprobe while handling another kprobe.
>
> However, if one of the probe handlers causes a fault, we are currently
> incrementing 'nmissed'. The comment in fault handler indicates that this
> can be used to account faults taken by the probe handlers. But, this has
> never been the intention as is evident from the comment above 'nmissed'
> in 'struct kprobe':
>
> /*count the number of times this probe was temporarily disarmed */
> unsigned long nmissed;
>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> I'm posting this here so that these can go together, if the patch is ok
> otherwise.
I had the other two queued in perf/core and was about to push then to
tip, Masami are you good with adding this on top?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists