[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250427180432.GC27775@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2025 20:04:32 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas@...ch.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core 08/22] uprobes/x86: Add mapping for optimized
uprobe trampolines
On 04/21, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> +struct uprobe_trampoline {
> + struct hlist_node node;
> + unsigned long vaddr;
> + atomic64_t ref;
> +};
I don't really understand the point of uprobe_trampoline->ref...
set_orig_insn/swbp_unoptimize paths don't call uprobe_trampoline_put().
It is only called in unlikely case when swbp_optimize() fails, so perhaps
we can kill this member and uprobe_trampoline_put() ? At least in the initial
version.
> +static void uprobe_trampoline_put(struct uprobe_trampoline *tramp)
> +{
> + if (tramp && atomic64_dec_and_test(&tramp->ref))
> + destroy_uprobe_trampoline(tramp);
> +}
Why does it check tramp != NULL ?
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists