From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
Anton Arapov <anton@redhat.com>, Frank Eigler <fche@redhat.com>,
Josh Stone <jistone@redhat.com>,
"Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki@in.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes: Teach handler_chain() to filter out the probed task
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:13:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130109181310.GA488@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130109173918.GL1325@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 01/09, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> [2013-01-08 20:00:18]:
>
> > They shouldn't in any case. To remind, we can optimize filter_chain()
> > for example and avoid the potentially costly uc->filter() call. Say,
> > we can detect/remember the fact that at least one consumre has
> > ->filter == NULL.
> >
> > OTOH, UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE is not really pre-filtering (although I think
> > it helps to make the things better). It is more like uprobe_unapply_mm()
> > which (perhaps) we need as well. But doing uprobe_unapply_mm() from
> > uc->handler is a) deadlockable and b) not optimal because it has to
> > consult other consumers.
> >
> > Anyway I agree, the folks writing handlers should understand what do they
> > do ;) and this needs some documentation.
>
> If we document explicitly that filter wont be called, then this should
> be okay.
OK.
Can I take this as your ACK?
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-09 18:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-29 17:35 [PATCH 0/1] uprobes: Teach handler_chain() to filter out the probed task Oleg Nesterov
2012-12-29 17:36 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2013-01-08 11:18 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2013-01-08 19:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-01-09 17:39 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2013-01-09 18:13 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2013-01-10 5:35 ` Srikar Dronamraju
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130109181310.GA488@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@redhat.com \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=jistone@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=suzuki@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).