From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: acme@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@redhat.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
kan.liang@intel.com, yao.jin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Poll for monitored tasks being alive in fork mode
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 14:25:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190106132509.GA31228@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec011f77-e08e-4471-4479-0cb0281fa79b@linux.intel.com>
On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 11:16:40AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
>
>
> On 1/4/2019 8:54 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:28:17AM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
> > > Following test shows the stat keeps running even if no longer
> > > task to monitor (mgen exits at ~5s).
> > >
> > > perf stat -e cycles -p `pgrep mgen` -I1000 -- sleep 10
> > > time counts unit events
> > > 1.000148916 1,308,365,864 cycles
> > > 2.000379171 1,297,269,875 cycles
> > > 3.000556719 1,297,187,078 cycles
> > > 4.000914241 761,261,827 cycles
> > > 5.001306091 <not counted> cycles
> > > 6.001676881 <not counted> cycles
> > > 7.002046336 <not counted> cycles
> > > 8.002405651 <not counted> cycles
> > > 9.002766625 <not counted> cycles
> > > 10.001395827 <not counted> cycles
> > >
> > > We'd better finish stat immediately if there's no longer task to
> > > monitor.
> > >
> > > After:
> > >
> > > perf stat -e cycles -p `pgrep mgen` -I1000 -- sleep 10
> > > time counts unit events
> > > 1.000180062 1,236,592,661 cycles
> > > 2.000421539 1,223,733,572 cycles
> > > 3.000609910 1,297,047,663 cycles
> > > 4.000807545 1,297,215,816 cycles
> > > 5.001001578 1,297,208,032 cycles
> > > 6.001390345 582,343,659 cycles
> > > sleep: Terminated
> > >
> > > Now the stat exits immediately when the monitored tasks ends.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > tools/perf/builtin-stat.c | 7 +++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> > > index 63a3afc..71f3bc8 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> > > @@ -553,6 +553,13 @@ static int __run_perf_stat(int argc, const char **argv, int run_idx)
> > > if (interval || timeout) {
> > > while (!waitpid(child_pid, &status, WNOHANG)) {
> > > + if (!is_target_alive(&target,
> > > + evsel_list->threads) &&
> > > + (child_pid != -1)) {
> >
> > do we need that child_pid check? we just returned from waitpid
> > so we should be ok.. we just make the race window smaller
> >
> > could we just do:
> >
> > if (!is_target_alive(&target, evsel_list->threads)) {
> > kill(child_pid, SIGTERM);
> > break;
> > }
> >
>
> I think this code should be OK and I have tested yet. I have a question
> about the race condition, we really don't need a lock to protect the
> child_pid?
>
> skip_signal()
> {
> /*
> * render child_pid harmless
> * won't send SIGTERM to a random
> * process in case of race condition
> * and fast PID recycling
> */
> child_pid = -1;
> }
>
> __run_perf_stat()
> {
> ....
> kill(child_pid, SIGTERM);
> }
>
> If child_pid is set by -1 in a small window between checking of child_pid
> and kill(), then kill(-1, SIGTERM) may happen. All processes except the kill
> process itself and init would receive SIGTERM.
ah right, -1 is special.. however that can still happen also
in the orginal patch.. how about we do something like below
jirka
---
diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
index acfd48db52dd..c322cb271180 100644
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
@@ -583,6 +583,14 @@ static int __run_perf_stat(int argc, const char **argv, int run_idx)
if (interval || timeout) {
while (!waitpid(child_pid, &status, WNOHANG)) {
+ if (!is_target_alive(&target, evsel_list->threads)) {
+ int pid = child_pid;
+
+ if (pid != -1)
+ kill(pid, SIGTERM);
+ break;
+ }
+
nanosleep(&ts, NULL);
if (timeout)
break;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-06 13:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-04 2:28 [PATCH] perf stat: Poll for monitored tasks being alive in fork mode Jin Yao
2019-01-04 12:54 ` Jiri Olsa
2019-01-05 3:16 ` Jin, Yao
2019-01-06 13:25 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2019-01-06 14:02 ` Jin, Yao
2019-01-06 15:57 ` 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=20190106132509.GA31228@krava \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=yao.jin@intel.com \
--cc=yao.jin@linux.intel.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