[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240913100749.GB19305@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 12:07:49 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
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: [PATCHv3 1/7] uprobe: Add support for session consumer
On 09/13, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 06:20:29PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > +
> > > + if (rc == 0 && uc->ret_handler) {
> >
> > should we enter this block if uc->handler == NULL?
>
> yes, consumer can have just ret_handler defined
Sorry, I meant we do not need to push { cookie, id } into return_instance
if uc->handler == NULL.
And in fact I'd prefer (but won't insist) the new
UPROBE_HANDLER_I_WANT_MY_COOKIE_PLEASE
return code to make this logic more explicit.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists