mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: wenyang.linux@foxmail.com
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] exit: move trace_sched_process_exit earlier in do_exit()
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:57:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240319145718.2bfb0d526ff441c8b37eab09@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tencent_277EBFCF545587D4FD41EF932AE972CC6708@qq.com>

On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 13:25:29 +0800 wenyang.linux@foxmail.com wrote:

> From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@foxmail.com>
> 
> Currently coredump_task_exit() takes some time to wait for the generation
> of the dump file. But if the user-space wants to receive a notification
> as soon as possible it maybe inconvenient.

If userspace is awaiting this notification to say "it's now OK to read
the dump file" then it could break things?

> Move trace_sched_process_exit() earlier in do_exit().
> This way a user-space monitor could detect the exits and
> potentially make some preparations in advance.
> 
> Oleg initially proposed this suggestion, and Steven further provided some
> detailed suggestions, and Mathieu carefully checked the historical code
> and said:
> : I've checked with Matthew Khouzam (maintainer of Trace Compass)
> : which care about this tracepoint, and we have not identified any
> : significant impact of moving it on its model of the scheduler, other
> : than slightly changing its timing.
> : I've also checked quickly in lttng-analyses and have not found
> : any code that care about its specific placement.
> : So I would say go ahead and move it earlier in do_exit(), it's
> : fine by me.

I'm not seeing a clear need for this change.  "maybe inconveniant" is
quite thin.  Please fully describe what motivated you to work on this?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-19 21:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-10  5:25 wenyang.linux
2024-03-12 15:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-03-19 21:57 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2024-03-23 15:30   ` Wen Yang

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=20240319145718.2bfb0d526ff441c8b37eab09@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=wenyang.linux@foxmail.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome