[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNNi1WoE0gsq5TSv8ys68YcF2o+LtWiDj+=bZ3Y46oP7Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2023 18:05:10 +0100
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
Cc: Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
"Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] perf: Reorder overflow handler ahead of event_limit/sigtrap
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 at 17:35, Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com> wrote:
>
> The perf subsystem already allows an overflow handler to clear pending_kill
> to suppress a fasync signal (although nobody currently does this). Allow an
> overflow handler to suppress the other visible side effects of an overflow,
> namely event_limit accounting and SIGTRAP generation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kyle Huey <khuey@...ehuey.com>
> ---
> kernel/events/core.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index b704d83a28b2..19fddfc27a4a 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -9541,6 +9541,12 @@ static int __perf_event_overflow(struct perf_event *event,
> */
>
> event->pending_kill = POLL_IN;
> +
> + READ_ONCE(event->overflow_handler)(event, data, regs);
> +
> + if (!event->pending_kill)
> + return ret;
It's not at all intuitive that resetting pending_kill to 0 will
suppress everything else, too. There is no relationship between the
fasync signals and SIGTRAP. pending_kill is for the former and
pending_sigtrap is for the latter. One should not affect the other.
A nicer solution would be to properly undo the various pending_*
states (in the case of pending_sigtrap being set it should be enough
to reset pending_sigtrap to 0, and also decrement
event->ctx->nr_pending).
Although I can see why this solution is simpler. Perhaps with enough
comments it might be clearer.
Preferences?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists