From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: wenyang.linux@foxmail.com
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3] exit: move trace_sched_process_exit earlier in do_exit()
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 11:28:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZgfpPFYmvSg4WC+c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tencent_F5D82FE0B9A0CA9C3A29C866F225FD915905@qq.com>
* wenyang.linux@foxmail.com <wenyang.linux@foxmail.com> wrote:
> From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@foxmail.com>
>
> In a safety critical system, when some processes exit abnormally, it
> is hoped that prompt information can be reported to the monitor as
> soon as possible.
If this event is so critical to catch, a probe can be put on do_exit().
This will be superior to your patch, because it will notify about the
event even sooner.
> Commit 2d4bcf886e42 ("exit: Remove profile_task_exit &
> profile_munmap") simplified the code, but also removed
> profile_task_exit(), which may prevent third-party kernel modules
> from detecting process exits timely.
Could you point out an example of such third-party kernel modules, and
why we should care about them?
> Compared to adding an extra tracking point, it is better to move the
> existing trace_sched_process_exit() earlier in do_exit(), since any
> tracer interested in knowing the point where a task is really
> reclaimed is trace_sched_process_free() called from
> delayed_put_task_struct().[1]
I disagree, I think this scheduler tracepoint should be moved even
*later* in the exit sequence, and be combined with
sched_autogroup_exit_task(), so that the scheduler only has a single
exit-notification callback in essence.
Until this is all done cleanly no tree should pick up this change:
NAKed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Thanks,
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-30 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-30 2:52 [RESEND PATCH v3] exit: move trace_sched_process_exit earlier in do_exit() wenyang.linux
2024-03-30 10:28 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
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=ZgfpPFYmvSg4WC+c@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=wenyang.linux@foxmail.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