[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6IBJd606FJwXKDw@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 15:38:29 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>,
Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] perf report: Ignore SIGPIPE for srcline
Em Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:08:50AM -0800, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:25 PM Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/15/2022 9:28 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > It can get SIGPIPE when it uses an external addr2line process and the
> > > process was terminated unexpectedly. Let's ignore the signal and move
> > > on to the next sample. The sample will get the default srcline value
> > > anyway.
> >
> >
> > That's a bit dangerous -- if perf report output is piped to something
> > else you really want to stop on SIGPIPE.
>
> Maybe we can handle the pipe write errors gracefully, but it'd require
> more changes in many places.
>
> >
> > You would need to find a way to distinguish those cases.
>
> Hmm.. ok. I guess we can just drop this for now. With checking
> the .debug_line section, problematic cases should be gone mostly.
So just skip this one, ok, I'll cherry pick the rest. Done.
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists