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

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Fri Jun 27 2014 - 14:33:29 EST


I do not know why dd9fa555d7bb "tracing/uprobes: Move argument fetching
to uprobe_dispatcher()" added the UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE, but it looks
wrong.

OK, perhaps it makes sense to avoid store_trace_args() if the tracee is
nacked by uprobe_perf_filter(). But then we should kill the same code
in uprobe_perf_func() and unify the TRACE/PROFILE filtering (we need to
do this anyway to mix perf/ftrace). Until then this code actually adds
the pessimization because uprobe_perf_filter() will be called twice and
return T in likely case.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 6 ------
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index 08e7970..c4cf0ab 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
@@ -1208,12 +1208,6 @@ static int uprobe_dispatcher(struct uprobe_consumer *con, struct pt_regs *regs)

current->utask->vaddr = (unsigned long) &udd;

-#ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
- if ((tu->tp.flags & TP_FLAG_TRACE) == 0 &&
- !uprobe_perf_filter(&tu->consumer, 0, current->mm))
- return UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE;
-#endif
-
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!uprobe_cpu_buffer))
return 0;

--
1.5.5.1

--
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/