On 02/04, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com> [2013-01-31 20:18:32]:
>
> > Move tu->nhit++ from uprobe_trace_func() to uprobe_dispatcher().
> >
> > ->nhit counts how many time we hit the breakpoint inserted by this
> > uprobe, we do not want to loose this info if uprobe was enabled by
> > sys_perf_event_open().
> >
>
> Though I dont see a problem with this change, It seems unnecessary for
> me.
>
> Info from nhits is mostly for /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_profile
It is only for uprobe_profile, yes, and it is useful. Why should we hide
this info if this uprobe is used by perf?
> I am not sure how sys_perf_event_open() is making use of this?
I hope I'll send the final series today. From the changelog of the patch
which actually turns the filtering on:
Testing:
# perf probe -x /lib/libc.so.6 syscall
# perl -e 'syscall -1 while 1' &
[1] 530
# perf record -e probe_libc:syscall perl -e 'syscall -1 for
1..10; sleep 1'
# perf report --show-total-period
100.00% 10 perl libc-2.8.so [.]
syscall
Before this patch:
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_profile
/lib/libc.so.6 syscall 79291
A huge ->nrhit == 79291 reflects the fact that the background process
530 constantly hits this breakpoint too, even if doesn't contribute to
the output.
After the patch:
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_profile
/lib/libc.so.6 syscall 10
This shows that only the target process was punished by int3.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
