From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27396446BF6; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 19:12:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792005147; cv=none; b=oDFjv+pUSaFnuxGEdmwtdJLHPFoM78n7E0vkM67u9YqdH0zXGgi7y8Htyi1lSbG8FeZDbHyvo4OJcaz5tzpeOXyfgZ4nPagOwQnw1AWnYDOMjqMlj/gHXjiA1LfsocFdIMsORz7UKKSVbvuMKOmDJm/PUZ6j2bWjigoYJDtnr6k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792005147; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3Yt8JG7kLhGp5X9p+EnvxjJ8XF3dg5/DKrAi22K/xu4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oh2q5vBreo5Js8l9LJbQkywuwuj5CrNFg1k8yLf9pmDzaQR+rQbJBJOp3NPqPjVJ9vAMlJJyEJFyxou4x2rNqL0o1tnH6PrpJv1v+lz9uEFJnBi/vgQuWyx/aktVyaGQ7UOVmIoKkJTX+vL1Sy3d5Og0H3caSdND7VhdvlNr3TE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b=fsXECfeF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="fsXECfeF" Received: from CPC-beaub-VBQ1L.localdomain (unknown [70.37.26.61]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E29120B7166; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 12:12:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 9E29120B7166 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1792005135; bh=355K6LGeyfVGWmUeL4IXTXYSycURQhiaBcgGf7o0dC4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fsXECfeF/g+kmjNC01uJgi0efV9aYeZpLRdrsvfT2oN58oPwyb9WFVZpkIz9Vkvhq DddWdAWaK7zsrkI9222Uw0Vu3FR+pQEUdkWI36mdh8KKfmborOxCmzIHrh0rzLsJO4 F9zAISRST+kHOsnvK1Zm4FQ95su6F/6pZ0q2f7Ow= Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 19:12:15 +0000 From: Beau Belgrave To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Jeff Barnes , "linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mhiramat@kernel.org" , "mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "kees@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/user_events: Fail fork when event state duplication fails Message-ID: <20261014191206.GA65-beaub@linux.microsoft.com> References: <20261006083825.2bbeaef2@fedora> <0499A842-AA79-49A7-AAB5-47003DD799BE@getmailspring.com> <20261006101427.25e0f8f7@fedora> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20261006101427.25e0f8f7@fedora> On Tue, Oct 06, 2026 at 10:14:27AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 6 Oct 2026 09:42:39 -0400 > Jeff Barnes wrote: > > > So in this case the state being duplicated during fork() is state that > > the application itself established. That's why I think propagating the > > allocation failure back through fork() is preferable to silently > > allowing the child to lose that state. > > I agree. Great, with that: Reviewed-by: Beau Belgrave Thanks, -Beau > > -- Steve