[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240702130408.GH11386@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 15:04:08 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 bpf-next 1/9] uprobe: Add support for session consumer
On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 06:41:07PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> +static void
> +uprobe_consumer_account(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> +{
> + static unsigned int session_id;
> +
> + if (uc->session) {
> + uprobe->sessions_cnt++;
> + uc->session_id = ++session_id ?: ++session_id;
> + }
> +}
The way I understand this code, you create a consumer every time you do
uprobe_register() and unregister makes it go away.
Now, register one, then 4g-1 times register+unregister, then register
again.
The above seems to then result in two consumers with the same
session_id, which leads to trouble.
Hmm?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists