[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250310144717.GS5880@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:47:17 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, lucas.demarchi@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] perf: Rename perf_event_exit_task(.child)
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 04:38:36PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 08-Mar-25 1:03 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > The task passed to perf_event_exit_task() is not a child, it is
> > current. Fix this confusing naming, since much of the rest of the code
> > also relies on it being current.
> >
> > Specifically, both exec() and exit() callers use it with current as
> > the argument.
>
> ...
>
> > -static void perf_event_exit_task_context(struct task_struct *child, bool exit)
> > +static void perf_event_exit_task_context(struct task_struct *task, bool exit)
> > {
> > - struct perf_event_context *child_ctx, *clone_ctx = NULL;
> > + struct perf_event_context *ctx, *clone_ctx = NULL;
> > struct perf_event *child_event, *next;
> >
> > - WARN_ON_ONCE(child != current);
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(task != current);
>
> exec() codepath (i.e. copy_process()) passes child pointer, not 'current'.
I am confused, this not a new warning. Also, copy_process() is clone(),
exec() is another code path.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists