Re: [PATCH 1/5] uprobes: Change the callsite of uprobe_copy_process()

etup p->utask != NULL if necessary > > 2. setup uprobes_state.xol_area > > 3. use task_work_add(p) > > Also, move the definition of uprobe_copy_process() down so that it > can see get_utask(). > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 3.9+ > Signed-off-by: Oleg Ne

Re: [PATCH 2/5] uprobes: Introduce __create_xol_area()

> in xol_add_vma(), they both have no effect. > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 3.9+ > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju One nit below. > > /* Slot allocation for XOL */ > -static int xol_add_vma(struct xol_area *area) > +stat

Re: [PATCH 3/5] uprobes: Teach __create_xol_area() to accept the predefined vaddr

. > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 3.9+ > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More ma

Re: [PATCH 4/5] uprobes: Change uprobe_copy_process() to dup return_instances

in Cermak > Reported-by: David Smith > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More major

Re: [PATCH 2/5] uprobes: Introduce __create_xol_area()

possible, this is only a hint. */ > > Nit: This comment seems to be shifted unnecessarily. > This gets corrected in the next patch.. Sorry for the noise. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the

Re: [PATCH 5/5] uprobes: Change uprobe_copy_process() to dup xol_area

this also means that we can not handle the errors > properly, we obviously can not abort the already completed fork(). > So we simply print the warning if GFP_KERNEL allocation (the only > possible reason) fails. > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 3.9+ > Reported-by: Martin Cermak

Re: [PATCH 2/6] rcu: Create rcu_sync infrastructure

nize_sched() is only called by > rcu_sync_enter() and only if necessary. > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Document xol_area and arch_uprobe->insn/ixol

s executable mapping installed > + * by the probed task to execute the copy of the original instruction > + * mangled by set_swbp(). > + * > * On a breakpoint hit, thread contests for a slot. It frees the > * slot after singlestep. Currently a fixed number of slots are > * allocated.

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:

r binary... > > Sure, you need to support that sort of 'fully qualified name' for > duplicate symbols but the default 'libc:setjmp' should still point > to system libc. But what if a system has both 32 bit libc and 64 bit libc? Wont we could end up with 2 libc:setjmp?

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:

no? > There has to be a one to one association with the event name and its mapping. Every event name will finally map to a unique inode and an offset. One option would be for perf to look at these markers and have a different event name for similar markers in different executables. -- Than

Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf sched: Add documentation for timehist options

s > (latencies) > SYNOPSIS > > [verse] > -'perf sched' {record|latency|map|replay|script} > +'perf sched' {record|latency|map|replay|script|timehist} > > DESCRIPTION > --- > @@ -36,6 +36,11 @@ There are five variants of perf s

Re: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes/tracing: uprobe_perf_open() forgets to handle the error from uprobe_apply()

Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju (with 2 nits that you can ignore) > done = tu->filter.nr_systemwide || > - event->parent || event->attr.enable_on_exec || > + (event->hw.tp_targe

Re: [PATCH 1/3] uprobes/x86: Rename *riprel* helpers to make the naming consistent

; Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH 2/3] uprobes/x86: Kill the "autask" arg of riprel_pre_xol()

task. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH 3/3] uprobes/x86: Simplify riprel_{pre,post}_xol() and make them similar

l_pre_xol(), like the same check in riprel_post_xol(). > > 2. Add the trivial scratch_reg() helper which returns the address of >scratch register pre_xol/post_xol need to change. > > 3. Change these functions to use the new helper and avoid copy-and-paste >under if/else branches.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] uprobes/x86: Add uprobe_init_insn(), kill validate_insn_{32,64}bits()

add it back later along with > the similar one for good_insns_32. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to maj

Re: [PATCH 2/5] uprobes/x86: Add is_64bit_mm(), kill validate_insn_bits()

t_insn(is_64bit_mm(mm). > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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

Re: [PATCH 3/5] uprobes/x86: Shift "insn_complete" from branch_setup_xol_ops() to uprobe_init_insn()

* Oleg Nesterov [2014-04-19 19:01:55]: > Change uprobe_init_insn() to make insn_complete() == T, this makes > other insn_get_*() calls unnecessary. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from thi

Re: [PATCH 4/5] uprobes/x86: Make good_insns_* depend on CONFIG_X86_*

; the extra code, gcc is smart enough, although the code is fine even if > it could not detect that (without CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION) is_64bit_mm() > is __builtin_constant_p(). > > The patch looks more complicated because it also moves good_insns_64 > up close to good_insns_32. > >

Re: [PATCH 5/5] uprobes/x86: Fix is_64bit_mm() with CONFIG_X86_X32

of 1. This allows to fix is_64bit_mm() > without affecting other users, they all treat ia32_compat as "bool". > > TIF_ in ->ia32_compat looks a bit strange, but this is grep-friendly > and avoids the new define's. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > ---

Re: Tasks stuck in futex code (in 3.14-rc6)

back to the explicit waiter counting code). -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH 5/7] tracing/uprobes: kill the dead TRACE_EVENT_FL_USE_CALL_FILTER logic

kzalloc'ed and we realy on this fact > anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vg

Re: [PATCH 4/4] tracing/uprobes: Fix the usage of uprobe_buffer_enable() in probe_event_enable()

tp.flags and free event_file_link. > > 3. If uprobe_register() fails it should do uprobe_buffer_disable(). > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju (one nit .. ) > + ret = uprobe_buffer_enable(); > + if (ret) > + goto err_flags

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] sched/fair: Disable runtime_enabled on dying rq

et_cfs_bandwidth(). > Move cfs_rq->runtime_enabled=0 above unthrottle_cfs_rq(). > > Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai > CC: Konstantin Khorenko > CC: Ben Segall > CC: Paul Turner > CC: Srikar Dronamraju > CC: Mike Galbraith > CC: Peter Zijlstra > CC: Ingo Moln

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/rt: __disable_runtime: Enqueue just unthrottled rt_rq back on the stack

* Kirill Tkhai [2014-06-25 12:19:48]: > > Make rt_rq available for pick_next_task(). Otherwise, their tasks > stay prisoned long time till dead cpu becomes alive again. > > Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai > CC: Konstantin Khorenko > CC: Ben Segall > CC: Paul Turner

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] sched/rt: __disable_runtime: Enqueue just unthrottled rt_rq back on the stack

* Kirill Tkhai [2014-06-25 12:19:48]: > > Make rt_rq available for pick_next_task(). Otherwise, their tasks > stay prisoned long time till dead cpu becomes alive again. > > Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai > CC: Konstantin Khorenko > CC: Ben Segall > CC: Paul Turner

Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] sched: Rework check_for_tasks()

task may be queued, that we want to be > reported too. > > 3)Use read_lock() instead of write_lock(). > This function does not change any structures, and > read_lock() is enough. > > Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai > CC: Konstantin Khorenko > CC: Ben Segall > CC: P

Re: [PATCH 1/4] tracing/uprobes: Revert "Support mix of ftrace and perf"

> "register" and "apply" should be clearly separated. > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # v3.14 > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" i

Re: [PATCH 2/4] uprobes: Change unregister/apply to WARN() if uprobe/consumer is gone

ould fix this poorly designed interface. > uprobe_register() should return "struct uprobe *" which should be > passed to apply/unregister. Plus other semantic changes, see the > changelog in commit 41ccba029e94. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju --

Re: [PATCH 3/4] tracing/uprobes: Kill the bogus UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE code in uprobe_dispatcher()

d twice and > return T in likely case. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More major

Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Rework migrate_tasks()

d by pick_next_task(), then can it probably mean that rq->rd was NULL? -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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

Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Rework migrate_tasks()

in. > > > > If we are still seeing tasks not being picked by pick_next_task(), then > > can it probably mean that rq->rd was NULL? > > Unthrottle functions dl_task_timer() and unthrottle_cfs_rq() put tasks and > queues back. They do not look at rq->rd. What I meant

Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Shift ->readpage check from __copy_insn() to uprobe_register()

egister/unregister interface was > poorly designed from the very beginning. > > Reported-by: Denys Vlasenko > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscrib

Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Teach copy_insn() to support tmpfs

to check shmem_mapping() if ->readpage == NULL. > > Reported-by: Denys Vlasenko > Suggested-by: Hugh Dickins > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Add mem_cgroup_charge_anon() into uprobe_write_opcode()

the new "uncharge" label) the patch also > moves anon_vma_prepare() up before we alloc/charge the new page. > > While at it fix the comment about ->mmap_sem, it is held for write. > > Suggested-by: Hugh Dickins > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Acked-by: Srikar Drona

Re: sched: spinlock recursion in migrate_swap_stop

uld the above condition should always be successul right? Or am I missing something? > ret = stop_two_cpus(arg.dst_cpu, arg.src_cpu, migrate_swap_stop, > &arg); > > out: > > > Which seems to get hit. This sounds like a race with task moving to > other cp

Re: [PATCH] uprobes/x86: Rename arch_uprobe->def into ->dflt, minor comment updates

3. Remove the stale part of the comment in arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(). > > Suggested-by: Jim Keniston > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:

an user might believe that his binary may not have markers. I know the above reason is more of a user folly than a tooling issue. > So instead of doing all the command line magic above I'd do: > > perf list > > libc:setjmp [SDT marker] > > and I could just d

Re: [PATCH v2] sched: Check sched_domain before computing group power.

} > + > + sgp = rq->sd->groups->sgp; > + power_orig += sgp->power_orig; > + power += sgp->power; > } > } else { > /* > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju --

Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] perf/sdt: Add support to perf record to trace SDT events

;d like to support SDT on both > of > perf-record and perf-probe :) > And even if we'll hide sdt related events via perf, users can access it via > ftrace. > So, I doubt that we can completely hide them, in that case, honesty is the > best way;) > I am somehow not abl

Re: [PATCH v1 10/10] uprobes: Remove "weak" from function declarations

> order (see 10629d711ed7 ("PCI: Remove __weak annotation from > pcibios_get_phb_of_node decl")). > > Remove the "weak" attribute from the declarations so we always prefer a > non-weak definition over the weak one, independent of link order. > Acked-by: Srikar Dr

Re: [PATCH 05/10] uprobes: share the i_mmap_rwsem

sively, > so share it and allow concurrent readers to build the mapping > data. > > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso Copying Oleg (since he should have been copied on this one) Please see one comment below. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju > --- > kernel/events/uprobes.c

Re: [PATCH] sched:skip loop non-idle cpus after find an idle cpu while find_idlest_cpu

min_load = load; > -- > 1.8.0.1 > > -- > 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

Re: [PATCH] sched:skip loop non-idle cpus after find an idle cpu while find_idlest_cpu

* Yao Dongdong [2014-10-27 16:58:05]: > On 2014/10/27 16:04, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > * Yao Dongdong [2014-10-27 11:13:17]: > > > >> Idle cpu is idler than non-idle cpu, so we needn't loop non-idle cpus > >> after find an idle cpu. > >> >

[PATCH] sched/numa: Restore sched feature NUMA to its earlier avatar.

ER feature. Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 587a2f6..aea72d5 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -5676,10 +5676,10 @@ static int migrate_degrades_locality(struct task_struct *p, struct lb_env *env) uns

Re: [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Prefer NUMA hotness over cache hotness

* Srikar Dronamraju [2015-07-07 05:49:31]: > * tip-bot for Srikar Dronamraju [2015-07-06 08:50:28]: > > > Commit-ID: 8a9e62a238a3033158e0084d8df42ea116d69ce1 > > Gitweb: > > http://git.kernel.org/tip/8a9e62a238a3033158e0084d8df42ea116d69ce1 > >

Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: Restore sched feature NUMA to its earlier avatar.

g the hinting faults. However the other feature NUMA_FAVOUR_HIGHER / NUMA_FAVOR_BUSY_NODES will only affect if we want to give a numa bias when we do the regular load balance. It wouldnt affect numa hinting faults or the tasks swaps that we do based on numa faults. So its impact is very limited. Would y

Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: Restore sched feature NUMA to its earlier avatar.

wap/migrate_task_to already move tasks without bothering about cache hotness so that convergence is achieved. > > I.e. this patch sucks on multiple grounds, and 8a9e62a probably sucks as > well. And > you added a Reviewed-by while you should have noticed at least 2-3 flaws in > the &g

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] sched: Replace sd_busy/nr_busy_cpus with sched_domain_shared

ks. (This is unlike power 7). -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH] check_for_tasks: read_lock(tasklist_lock) doesn't need to disable irqs

* Oleg Nesterov [2015-09-10 15:07:50]: > check_for_tasks() doesn't need to disable irqs, recursive read_lock() > from interrupt is fine. > > While at it, s/do_each_thread/for_each_process_thread/. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Looks good to me. Reviewe

Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: Disable sched_numa_balancing on uma systems

; > > So why is the 'NUMA' sched_features option still twiddled? Your patch splits > out a > sched_numa_balancing flag - so the NUMA/NO_NUMA feature can go away, right? > I thought we could retain sched_feat so that we could enable/disable sched numa balancing for debug

Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Setup separate EFI page tables in kexec paths

l to efi_setup_page_tables() should have > existed for kexec before commit 67a9108ed431. Things just magically > worked because we were actually using the kernel's page tables that > contained the required mappings. > > Reported-by: Srikar Dronamraju > Cc: Raghavendra K T

Re: [PATCH 01/33] mm: introduce get_user_pages_remote()

to the memory. > + */ > + result = get_user_pages_remote(NULL, mm, vaddr, 1, 0, 1, &page, NULL); > if (result < 0) > return result; > Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [RFC][PATCH 10/23 v4] tracing/uprobes: Do not use return values of trace_seq_printf()

asami Hiramatsu > Cc: Namhyung Kim > Cc: Srikar Dronamraju > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a m

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/23 v4] kprobes/tracing: Use trace_seq_has_overflowed() for overflow checks

code quite a bit and also takes us a step closer to > changing the return values of trace_seq_printf() and friends to void. > > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt Looks good me to me. Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- T

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

uprobe code was probably a > workaround for the x86 bug. With that bug fixed, we can remove > _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME from the uprobes code. > > Cc: Srikar Dronamraju > Reported-by: Oleg Nesterov > Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/thread_i

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

* Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 23:01:12]: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Srikar Dronamraju > wrote: > > * Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 14:31:21]: > > > >> x86 call do_notify_resume on paranoid returns if TIF_UPROBE is set > >> but not on non-paranoi

Re: [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Add advisory flag for borrowing a timeslice (was: Pre-emption control for userspace)

run. > Is there a way for us to identify if the lock is contended? Because it may not be prudent to allow a task to borrow timeslice for a lock which isnt contended. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-k

Re: [PATCH 10/26 v5] tracing/uprobes: Do not use return values of trace_seq_printf()

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20141114011411.693008...@goodmis.org > > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu > Cc: Namhyung Kim > Cc: Srikar Dronamraju > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju > --- -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH 04/10] uprobes: Change prepare_uretprobe() to use uprobe_warn()

esterov Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju > --- -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/ma

Re: [PATCH 05/10] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to find the next chain beforehand

erov Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH 06/10] uprobes: Introduce struct arch_uretprobe

> --- Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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

Re: [PATCH 07/10] uprobes/x86: Introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive()

know that the probed func > has already returned. > > TODO: this assumes that the probed app can't use multiple stacks (say > sigaltstack). We will try to improve this logic later. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju >

Re: [PATCH 08/10] uprobes: Change handle_trampoline() to flush the frames invalidated by longjmp()

e() > can be fooled by sigaltstack/etc. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to m

Re: [PATCH 07/10] uprobes/x86: Introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive()

(regs) <= sp; } Am I missing something? > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH 09/10] uprobes: Change prepare_uretprobe() to (try to) flush the dead frames

alive() can be false positive, > the stack can grow after longjmp(). Unfortunately, the kernel can't > 100% solve this problem, but see the next patch. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- > kernel/events/uprobes.c | 13 +++++ Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srika

Re: [PATCH 07/10] uprobes/x86: Introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive()

. We even seem to use this assumption when kprobe_tracer/uprobe_tracer fetch arguments from stack. See fetch_kernel_stack_address() / fetch_user_stack_address() and get_user_stack_nth(). -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH 01/10] uprobes: Introduce get_uprobe()

* Oleg Nesterov [2015-05-04 14:48:50]: > Cosmetic. Add the new trivial helper, get_uprobe(). It matches > put_uprobe() we already have and we can simplify a couple of its > users. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubs

Re: [PATCH 02/10] uprobes: Introduce free_ret_instance()

* Oleg Nesterov [2015-05-04 14:48:54]: > We can simplify uprobe_free_utask() and handle_uretprobe_chain() > if we add a simple helper which does put_uprobe/kfree and returns > the ->next return_instance. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- Looks good to me. Acked-

Re: [PATCH 03/10] uprobes: Send SIGILL if handle_trampoline() fails

. It is pointless to return to user mode >with the corrupted instruction_pointer() which we can't restore. I agree > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line &quo

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched, numa: Ignore pinned tasks

its numa faults but then is pinned to a different cpu, then we can see this warning.:w! -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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 h

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched, numa: Ignore pinned tasks

ong' node > + * - movable: there are (migratable) tasks > + * - all: there are tasks >* >* In order to avoid migrating ideally placed numa tasks, > * ignore those when there's better options. --

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] sched, numa: Ignore pinned tasks

* Peter Zijlstra [2015-05-18 15:06:58]: > On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 18:30 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > > > > static void account_numa_dequeue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) > > > { > > > + if (p->nr_cpus_allowed ==

Re: [PATCH 07/10] uprobes/x86: Introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive()

same code with (say) powerpc, we can always cleanup > this later, this is trivial. Right now I'd like to ensure that if the > same or similar logic can work on powerpc, it only needs to touch the > code in arch/powerpc. > > Oleg. > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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/

Re: [PATCH V2] sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs

ld probably be there with the idle check. With the current code when the ilb cpus are not free: - We would be updating the nohz.next_balance even through we havent done any load balance. - We might iterate thro the nohz.idle_cpus_mask()s to find balance_cpus. -- Thanks and Regards

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/fair: fix update the nohz.next_balance even if we haven't done any load balance

t iterate thro the nohz.idle_cpus_mask()s to find balance_cpus. > > This patch fix it by adding need_resched check with the idle check, and > keep the need_resched check in for loop to catch ilb get busy. > > Suggested-by: Srikar Dronamraju > Reviewed-by: Jason Low > Signe

Re: [PATCH V2] sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs

one under circumstances > such as above. > > Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy > --- Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- 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 a

Re: [PATCH v10 10/11] sched: add SD_PREFER_SIBLING for SMT level

t and use a sd flag at current level than to look at child domain flag? > -- > 1.9.1 > > -- > 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/majord

[PATCH v2] sched/fair: Fix asym packing to select correct cpu

ebizzy: 37073983.00 40341911.00 38776241.80 1259766.82 4.6.0-rc2+asym-changes Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change ebizzy: 38030399.00 4178.00 39827404.40 1255001.86 +2.54% Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju --- since v1

Re: [PATCH] sched/cpuacct: Check for NULL when using task_pt_regs()

Works for me too. Reported-and-Tested-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/fair: Fix asym packing to select correct cpu

* Peter Zijlstra [2016-03-29 14:19:24]: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 05:04:40PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > If asymmetric packing is used when target cpu is busy, > > update_sd_pick_busiest(), can select a lightly loaded cpu. > > find_busiest_group() has checks to e

Re: [tip:sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Split usage accounting into user_usage and sys_usage

rnel_thread+0x58/0x74 git bisect shows this as the commit that causes the problem. I verifed by booting with the tip + revert of this commit. > + > rcu_read_unlock(); > } > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju phys_mem_size = 0x10 cpu_features = 0x0b7e

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] schedstat: Expose /proc/pid/schedstat if CONFIG_SCHED_INFO is set

long)task->se.sum_exec_runtime, > (unsigned long long)task->sched_info.run_delay, > task->sched_info.pcount); > -- > 2.4.0 > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "uns

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] schedstat: Expose /proc/pid/schedstat if CONFIG_SCHED_INFO is set

signed long in printf > Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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.ker

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] schedstat: Simplify sched_info accounting dependency

* Naveen N. Rao [2015-06-25 23:53:37]: > Both CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS and CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT track task sched_info. > Simplify by introducing a common CONFIG_SCHED_INFO selected by both. > > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao > --- Looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju

[PATCH 2/2] perf/stat: Fix a segmentation fault when using repeat forever

3,14,52,62,33,932 cycles 10.019880228 3,14,52,22,89,154 cycles 10.030543876 66,90,18,333 cycles 5.009848281 3,14,51,98,25,437 cycles 10.029854402 3,15,14,93,04,918 cycles 5.009834177 3,14,51,95,92,316 cycles Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju

[PATCH 0/2] Perf/stat: Solve problems with repeat and interval

There are some problems in perf stat when using a combination of repeat and interval options. This series tries to fix them. Srikar Dronamraju (2): perf/stat: Reset previous counts on repeat with interval perf/stat: Fix a segmentation fault when using repeat forever tools/perf/builtin

[PATCH 1/2] perf/stat: Reset previous counts on repeat with interval

5.000809863364 sched:sched_switch Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju --- tools/perf/builtin-stat.c | 3 +++ tools/perf/util/stat.c| 17 + tools/perf/util/stat.h| 1 + 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-

Re: [PATCH] tracing/probe: Fix to check the difference of nr_args before adding probe

ler+0x43/0x110 > ? mark_held_locks+0x29/0xa0 > ? do_syscall_64+0x14/0x260 > do_syscall_64+0x68/0x260 > > Fix to check the difference of nr_args before adding probe > on existing probes. This also may set the error log index > bigger than the number of command parame

Re: [PATCH] sched: Avoid spurious lock dependencies

re is a comment just after this which says "init_task() gets called multiple times on a task", should we add a check if rq->idle is present and bail out? if (rq->idle) { raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&idle->pi_lock, flags); return; } Also can we also move the above 3 statements before the lock? -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched/fair: Move active balance logic to its own function

cancelled? I do understand this behaviour was present even before this change. But still dont understand why we need to update if the current operation didn't kick active_load_balance. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

[PATCH] tracing/probe: Fix same probe event argument matching

obe if and only if all the arguments match. Fixes: fe60b0ce8e73 ("tracing/probe: Reject exactly same probe event") Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju --- kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c | 5 +++-- kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 5 +++-- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Re: [PATCH] tracing/probe: Test nr_args match in looking for same probe events

: write error: File exists #Add with less events with same name but different comm : SHOULD PASS # echo p:test _do_fork arg1=%gpr3 arg2=%gpr2 >> kprobe_events # cat kprobe_events p:kprobes/test _do_fork arg1=%gpr3 arg2=%gpr4 arg3=%gpr5 p:kprobes/test _do_fork arg1=%gpr3 arg2=%gpr2 -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH] tracing/probe: Test nr_args match in looking for same probe events

> > > > This has a side-effect where the newer probe has same argument commands, we > > still end up appending the probe. > > ?? > > How so? > > If the two have the same number of arguments we do exactly what we did > before this patch. Please explain to me how that side effect would happen? >

Re: [for-next][PATCH 7/8] tracing/probe: Reject exactly same probe event

t; + for (i = 0; i < orig->tp.nr_args; i++) { > + if (strcmp(orig->tp.args[i].comm, > + comp->tp.args[i].comm)) > + continue; Same as above. > + } > + > + return true; > + } > + > + return false; > +} > + -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [for-next][PATCH 7/8] tracing/probe: Reject exactly same probe event

> > goto outer_loop; > > > > } > > > > return true; > > outer_loop: > > } > > Correct, that's what I intended. > Could you make a fix patch on top of it? (or do I?) > > Thank you, Either way is fine. I can send out a patch tomorrow. But fine if you beat me to it. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched: introduce tunables to control soft affinity

be concentrated on the wakeup path, I don't see any changes in the regular load balancer or the numa-balancer. If system is loaded or tasks are CPU intensive, then wouldn't these tasks be moved to cpus_allowed instead of cpus_preferred and hence breaking this soft affinity. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] powerpc/numa: Prefer node id queried from vphn

NUMA_NO_NODE ? If so, > should we still call node_set_online() below ? Yeah, I think It makes sense to retain the BUG_ON and if check. Will incorporate both of them in the next version. > > > > node_set_online(nid); > > } > > > > -- > > 2.20.1 > > > -- > Thanks and Regards > gautham. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Keep memoryless cpuless node 0 offline

* Michal Hocko [2020-04-29 14:22:11]: > On Wed 29-04-20 07:11:45, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > > > > > > By marking, N_ONLINE as NODE_MASK_NONE, lets stop assuming that Node 0 > > > > is > > > > always online. > > > > >

[PATCH v3 0/3] Offline memoryless cpuless node 0

nuxppc-...@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: linux...@kvack.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Michal Hocko Cc: Mel Gorman Cc: Vlastimil Babka Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Christopher Lameter Cc: Michael Ellerman Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Gautham R Shenoy Srikar Dronamraj

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >