From: Don Mullis <dwm@meer.net>
To: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 6/7] process filtering for fault-injection capabilities
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:28:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1160760534.31851.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <452df238.04819267.55ff.ffffd8a2@mx.google.com>
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 16:43 +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> This patch provides process filtering feature.
> The process filter allows failing only permitted processes
> by /proc/<pid>/make-it-fail
Akinobu: Toward the end of the previous round of review, we had
the following exchange:
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 17:05 +0800, Akinobu Mita wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 10:54:51PM -0700, Don Mullis wrote:
> > Add functionality to the process_filter variable: A negative argument
> > injects failures for only for pid==-process_filter, thereby permitting
> > per-process failures from boot time.
> >
>
> Is it better to add new filter for this purpose?
> Because someone may want to filter by tgid instead of pid.
>
> - positive value is for task->pid
> - nevative value is for task->tgid
Your idea sounds good to me.
So naturally I'm wondering why the functionality was dropped.
An application I had in mind was to identify which of the boot-time
calls to the slab allocator must not fail but are not yet marked
__GFP_NOFAIL (some experimentation showed that for pid 1 there are
lots of these).
Andrew: Would such an exercise would be worth the effort?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-13 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20061012074305.047696736@gmail.com>
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 1/7] documentation and scripts Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 21:37 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-13 17:47 ` Akinobu Mita
2006-10-13 19:01 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 2/7] fault-injection capabilities infrastructure Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 21:03 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 3/7] fault-injection capability for kmalloc Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 8:08 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 4/7] fault-injection capability for alloc_pages() Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 21:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-13 17:51 ` Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 5/7] fault-injection capability for disk IO Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 21:08 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-13 7:03 ` Jens Axboe
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 6/7] process filtering for fault-injection capabilities Akinobu Mita
2006-10-13 17:28 ` Don Mullis [this message]
2006-10-13 18:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-12 7:43 ` [patch 7/7] stacktrace " Akinobu Mita
2006-10-12 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-13 18:00 ` Akinobu Mita
2006-10-13 18:12 ` Akinobu Mita
2006-10-13 19:06 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-13 19:03 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] <20061108174540.976625689@gmail.com>
2006-11-08 17:45 ` [patch 6/7] process " Akinobu Mita
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1160760534.31851.58.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=dwm@meer.net \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akinobu.mita@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®