From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Milind Chabbi <chabbi.milind@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/2] perf/hw_breakpoint: Remove superfluous bp->attr.disabled = 0 new attr has disabled set
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 17:08:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180806150836.GD16446@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180806132353.GA7463@krava>
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 03:23:53PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 02:48:40PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 08/06, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > We need to change the breakpoint even if the attr with
> > > new fields has disabled set to true.
> >
> > Agreed... The patch looks fine to me, but I have a question
> >
> > > int modify_user_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp, struct perf_event_attr *attr)
> > > {
> > > + int err;
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * modify_user_hw_breakpoint can be invoked with IRQs disabled and hence it
> > > * will not be possible to raise IPIs that invoke __perf_event_disable.
> > > @@ -520,11 +522,11 @@ int modify_user_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp, struct perf_event_attr *att
> > > else
> > > perf_event_disable(bp);
> > >
> > > - if (!attr->disabled) {
> > > - int err = modify_user_hw_breakpoint_check(bp, attr, false);
> > > + err = modify_user_hw_breakpoint_check(bp, attr, false);
> > > + if (err)
> > > + return err;
> > >
> > > - if (err)
> > > - return err;
> > > + if (!attr->disabled) {
> > > perf_event_enable(bp);
> > > bp->attr.disabled = 0;
> >
> > Afaics you do not need to clear attr.disabled, modify_user_hw_breakpoint_check()
> > updates it if err = 0. So I think
> >
> > if (!bp->attr.disabled)
> > perf_event_enable(bp);
> >
> > will look a bit better.
> >
> >
> > But, with or without this fix, shouldn't we set .disabled = 1 if modify_() fails?
> > IIUC this doesn't matter, bp->attr.disabled is not really used anyway, but looks a
> > bit confusing.
> >
>
> yea, I was looking on that, but as u said it makes no difference
> and I wanted to keep the patch as simple as possible ;-)
>
> I'll send something on top of this patch
like this ;-)
jirka
---
Once the breakpoint was succesfully modified, the attr->disabled
value is in bp->attr.disabled. So there's no reason to set it
again, removing that.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-v5oaellzsmyszv3rfucuxkp0@git.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
index fb229d9c7f3c..3e560d7609fd 100644
--- a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
+++ b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c
@@ -526,10 +526,9 @@ int modify_user_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp, struct perf_event_attr *att
if (err)
return err;
- if (!attr->disabled) {
+ if (!attr->disabled)
perf_event_enable(bp);
- bp->attr.disabled = 0;
- }
+
return 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(modify_user_hw_breakpoint);
--
2.17.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-06 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-06 10:12 [PATCH 0/2] perf/hw_breakpoint: Fix breakpoint modify Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 10:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf tests: Add breakpoint modify test Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 10:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf/hw_breakpoint: Modify breakpoint even if the new attr has disabled set Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 12:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-06 13:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-06 13:37 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 13:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-06 14:21 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 13:23 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-08-06 13:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-06 15:08 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2018-08-06 16:34 ` [PATCH 3/2] perf/hw_breakpoint: Remove superfluous bp->attr.disabled = 0 " Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-07 8:16 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-08-07 9:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-07 14:39 ` Jiri Olsa
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=20180806150836.GD16446@krava \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chabbi.milind@gmail.com \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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