Re: [PATCH 08/12] add trace events for each syscall entry/exit

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 09:48:48AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > 
> > > That won't always work as pointed out in the other example:
> > > - Process doing sys_init_module then scheduled away
> > > - User enables syscall tracing -> TIF_SYSCALL_FTRACE gets set
> > > - init function of the module gets called and is doing kernel_thread()
> > >   (old API) -> kernel thread inherits TIF_SYSCALL_FTRACE.
> > > 
> > > I don't think that's what you want. You might want to clear the flag for
> > > new processes during fork (only for kernel threads I would guess).
> > > 
> > > At least the current patch leaves a hole.
> > 
> > 
> > Ah, there are callsites that use kernel_thread() directly?
> > Does it means that t->mm could be non NULL for such resulting
> > kernel threads, in that case it would be hard to hook on
> > do_fork() to check that.
> 
> All kernel threads have a NULL t->mm. Since do_fork is called by kthreadd 
> and not by kthread_create, the caller of do_fork will also have a
> t->mm = NULL.
> 
> -- Steve
> 

Yeah, that's the case with kthread_create() creation fashion,
but what if you create a kernel thread using the low level
kernel_thread() directly (ie: without relaying on kthreadd queue)?

Especially in Heiko example, it seems to be a duplication of user
task.

I wonder what obvious think I'm missing here...

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/