Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing: Add a trace for task_exit
From: Eric W. Biederman
Date: Mon May 03 2021 - 12:31:17 EST
<Peter.Enderborg@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 5/3/21 3:50 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> ----- On May 1, 2021, at 9:11 AM, rostedt rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 1 May 2021 09:29:41 +0000
>>> <Peter.Enderborg@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/30/21 7:48 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>>> Peter Enderborg <peter.enderborg@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the peer functions to task_rename and task_newtask.
>>>>>> With this we get hole "life-cycle" of task and can easily
>>>>>> see short livied task and their exit status.
>>>>> This patch is incorrect. The location you are dealing with is not part
>>>>> of task exit. The location you have instrumented is part of reaping a
>>>>> task which can come arbitrarily long after the task exits.
>>>> That is what it aiming. When using this as tool for userspace you
>>>> would like to know when the task is done. When it no longer
>>>> holds any thing that might have any impact. If you think the
>>>> exit imply something more specific I can change the name.
>>>>
>>>> I thought exit was a good name, it is in in exit.c.
>>>>
>>>> Will the name task_done, task_finished or task_reaped work for you?
>>> I think "task_reaped" is probably the best name, and the most
>>> descriptive of what happened.
>> What would it provide that is not already available through the "sched_process_free"
>> tracepoint in delayed_put_task_struct ?
>
> For task_exit (or task_reaped)
>
> field:pid_t pid; offset:8; size:4; signed:1;
> field:short oom_score_adj; offset:12; size:2; signed:1;
> field:int exit_signal; offset:16; size:4; signed:1;
> field:int exit_code; offset:20; size:4; signed:1;
> field:int exit_state; offset:24; size:4; signed:1;
> field:__data_loc char[] comm; offset:28; size:4; signed:1;
>
> sched_process_free
> field:char comm[16]; offset:8; size:16; signed:1;
> field:pid_t pid; offset:24; size:4; signed:1;
> field:int prio; offset:28; size:4; signed:1;
>
> So information about oom_score_adj, and it's exit parameters.
For the record returning oom_score_adj that late is not appropriate for
any kernel/user API. It is perfectly valid for the kernel to optimize
out anything that wait(2) does not return.
If you want oom_score_adj you probably need to sample it in
sched_process_exit.
I periodically move things from the point a process is reaped to the
point where a task stops running, for both correctness and for simpler
maintenance. When threads were added a bunch of cleanup was added
to the wrong place. I certainly would not hesitate to mess with
oom_score_adj if changing something would make the code simpler.
With both sched_process_free and sched_process_exit it looks like we
already have tracepoints everywhere they could be needed.
task exit.
Eric