Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:19:32 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc:     alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, acme@kernel.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, jolsa@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        namhyung@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, glider@google.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, arnd@arndb.de, christian@brauner.io,
        dvyukov@google.com, jannh@google.com, axboe@kernel.dk,
        mascasa@google.com, pcc@google.com, irogers@google.com,
        kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 8/8] selftests/perf: Add kselftest for
 remove_on_exec
Message-ID: <YFoVFM+xltCUGR/Q@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20210310104139.679618-1-elver@google.com>
 <20210310104139.679618-9-elver@google.com>
 <YFiamKX+xYH2HJ4E@elver.google.com>
 <YFjI5qU0z3Q7J/jF@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YFm6aakSRlF2nWtu@elver.google.com>
 <YFnDo7dczjDzLP68@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YFn/I3aKF+TOjGcl@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YFoQLfsZXPn9zuT4@elver.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YFoQLfsZXPn9zuT4@elver.google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 04:58:37PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 03:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 11:32:03AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > And at that point there's very little value in still using
> > > perf_event_exit_event()... let me see if there's something to be done
> > > about that.
> > 
> > I ended up with something like the below. Which then simplifies
> > remove_on_exec() to:
> > 
> [...]
> > 
> > Very lightly tested with that {1..1000} thing.
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Subject: perf: Rework perf_event_exit_event()
> > From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Date: Tue Mar 23 15:16:06 CET 2021
> > 
> > Make perf_event_exit_event() more robust, such that we can use it from
> > other contexts. Specifically the up and coming remove_on_exec.
> > 
> > For this to work we need to address a few issues. Remove_on_exec will
> > not destroy the entire context, so we cannot rely on TASK_TOMBSTONE to
> > disable event_function_call() and we thus have to use
> > perf_remove_from_context().
> > 
> > When using perf_remove_from_context(), there's two races to consider.
> > The first is against close(), where we can have concurrent tear-down
> > of the event. The second is against child_list iteration, which should
> > not find a half baked event.
> > 
> > To address this, teach perf_remove_from_context() to special case
> > !ctx->is_active and about DETACH_CHILD.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> 
> Very nice, thanks! It seems to all hold up to testing as well.
> 
> Unless you already have this on some branch somewhere, I'll prepend it
> to the series for now. I'll test some more and try to get v3 out
> tomorrow.

I have not queued it, so please keep it in your series so it stays
together (and tested).

Thanks!