[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7chKHryDF45QUV+UtgZ+qiLsOsseXR5hXb=D8JS74HREDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 07:12:48 -0800
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>, mingo@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] perf: Simplify perf_event_alloc() error path
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 1:58 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 12:50:19PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
> > > > -err_pmu:
> > > > - if (is_cgroup_event(event))
> > > > - perf_detach_cgroup(event);
> > > > - if (event->destroy)
> > > > - event->destroy(event);
> > > > - module_put(pmu->module);
> >
> > I'm afraid of this part. If it failed at perf_init_event(), it might
> > call event->destroy() already. I saw you cleared event->pmu
> > in the failure path. Maybe we need the same thing for the
> > event->destroy.
>
> In that case event->destroy will not yet have been set, no?
In perf_try_init_event(), it calls event->destroy() if set when it
has EXTENDED_REGS or NO_EXCLUDE capabilities and returns an error.
Thanks,
Namhyung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists