Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965168AbWH2Rcy (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:32:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965173AbWH2Rcy (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:32:54 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:664 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965168AbWH2Rcx (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:32:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:26:27 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: eranian@hpl.hp.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: new system calls support Message-Id: <20060829102627.1fee475b.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060829165957.GN22011@frankl.hpl.hp.com> References: <200608230805.k7N85tfm000384@frankl.hpl.hp.com> <20060823151439.a44aa13f.akpm@osdl.org> <20060829165957.GN22011@frankl.hpl.hp.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1758 Lines: 62 On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 09:59:57 -0700 Stephane Eranian wrote: > > > + > > > + PFM_DBG("going wait_inactive for [%d] state=%ld flags=0x%lx", > > > + task->pid, > > > + task->state, > > > + local_flags); > > > + > > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctx->lock, local_flags); > > > + > > > + wait_task_inactive(task); > > > + > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&ctx->lock, new_flags); > > > > This sort of thing.. > > We need to wait until the task is effectively off the CPU, i.e., with its > machine state (incl PMU) saved. When we come back we re-run the series of tests. > This applies only to per-thread, therefore it is not affected by smp_processor_id(). > Generally, if a reviewer asks a question and the developer answers that question, this is a sign that a code comment is needed. Because others are likely to ask themselves the same question ;) > > .. > > > > > When copying a struct from kernel to userspace we must beware of > > compiler-inserted padding. Because that can cause the kernel to leak > > a few bytes of uninitialised kernel memory. > > We are copying out exactly the same amount of data that was passed in. > > Are you suggesting that copy_from/copy_to may copy more data? No, that's OK. I was pointing out the problem in situations like this: struct foo { u32 a; u64 b; }; { struct foo f; f.a = 0; f.b = 0; copy_to_user(p, &f, sizeof(f)); } which exposes kernel memory. As you appear to be confident that the perfmon code can't do this, all is OK. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/