Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix probing for PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC flag

[David Ahern]

On 2/19/15 12:06 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >   	/* not supported, confirm error related to PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC */
> > -	fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, pid, cpu, -1, 0);
> > +	fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, 0, cpu, -1, 0);
>
> I would prefer to avoid pid = 0 unless necessary and so just do the same
> thing again i.e.
>
> 	while (1) {
> 		fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, pid, cpu, -1, 0);
> 		if (fd < 0 && pid == -1 && errno == EACCES) {
> 			pid = 0;
> 			continue;
> 		}
> 		break;
> 	}

The probing is getting of hand. In this case the intent is a probe for a 
flag and flags are the first thing checked kernel side. Given that the 
parameters passed to sys_perf_event_open should be as simple and known 
safe as possible. pid = -1 has known limitations. Why can't pid just be 
getpid() in both cases?

Simplifies this function a lot and removes the need for sched_getcpu(). So
    pid = getpid();

    fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, pid, -1, -1, PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC);

and if that fails

    fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, pid, -1, -1, 0);

Why is anything more complicated needed?

David


--
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/