From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C01A45563B; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 14:14:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791296085; cv=none; b=dQegfYFX1Pv3TDPxOOTLGxP+v3NDJfUC0D9A4ACC4KKctqlWbngm6eYTLNsvWn3qlcu91F5gN4RXiP40kMinsszAYckic2rty8LtEdFPDcJLnyDTMRe69lw7IuUwgKlbLArau1zwF4vjx/MZHm0ijSKzRzdXc6DkTIfNhky+HbM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791296085; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Wnkvw/PmiSIEwtzxymhqfsRqVQBcv77PR0tcXIczR4w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=YwPdQLGR8O/D5TqfznZBmfxrzuTYxHLizqME48sts5FR1+C2CNQt5Lpnwv6Ngp8AtHD7FnC/Kdn5XdmdRwA6DZlncudGnLf2UDdT/fYnl7JQo8xTakBeXSU3DCH6z3WGwz7dt6insii8u1V2bTTuEHXTA5/535rKV0iaj39FvRQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=goodmis.org header.i=@goodmis.org header.b=i+5yQQjq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=goodmis.org header.i=@goodmis.org header.b="i+5yQQjq" Received: from omf01.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F2940127; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 14:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 39A786000C; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 14:14:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 10:14:27 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Jeff Barnes Cc: Beau Belgrave , "linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mhiramat@kernel.org" , "mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "kees@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/user_events: Fail fork when event state duplication fails Message-ID: <20261006101427.25e0f8f7@fedora> In-Reply-To: <0499A842-AA79-49A7-AAB5-47003DD799BE@getmailspring.com> References: <20261006083825.2bbeaef2@fedora> <0499A842-AA79-49A7-AAB5-47003DD799BE@getmailspring.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout06 X-Stat-Signature: zxy5jkdnrzk4iyeo8by5p6yxpmcjamm5 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 39A786000C X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX19RhyJBrzcgp3fOfNPHDS4vRtVcqaJAIqk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=goodmis.org; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=dkim1; bh=Wnkvw/PmiSIEwtzxymhqfsRqVQBcv77PR0tcXIczR4w=; b=i+5yQQjq4bxzYZwILnKSz/M1zCsjL5q3ec51XWWVQdS4I7SacvWtPjIdEVvwjAfUjYgC3DUktamU5j/vPSGm3if+SRKUTcOuJsuhOtfbE687aY0oTHPN/KCtEK9t2uIQR7r9q0CybkOu8crsMm3IkOJWXs0tQhrLgc8L2aPu6/I= X-HE-Tag: 1791296072-18580 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX19qUYQ6JN7VyyT+ZigEhsnsqklDh2EP7CuUa1xaZiM0VdTBb24qabXRQ68hAsfk7gdv8NE3mSj/cUkX1ToGfehlVfjVXvOj0wnv786x07Sp8bcKHRkcYkU0kwb/7BE7sWaM6nCDz3nVZqffhuhyTYPm1idjxA+zImUYC3QxesSEy22yEh2qHE6v40OR4aD3++IIO8KlAROMFoNSlNVbU0aGwLzoA4SzKkIPBYPKzgqcjQWAeyiRapv5DkjWXb95L2287zlLEJ7PjA6f/Bp00JNqQjMxO62OjHtjH86SaFlnxxD5hTB1zX4dFkbpxmfDRYYzuxHFTtqxVnXSbkz5IzN3 On Tue, 6 Oct 2026 09:42:39 -0400 Jeff Barnes wrote: > So in this case the state being duplicated during fork() is state that > the application itself established. That's why I think propagating the > allocation failure back through fork() is preferable to silently > allowing the child to lose that state. I agree. -- Steve