Re: [PATCH v4] binder: tell userspace to dump current backtrace when detected oneway spamming

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:21:58PM +0800, Hang Lu wrote:
> On 4/9/2021 2:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 11:40:57AM +0800, Hang Lu wrote:
> >> When async binder buffer got exhausted, some normal oneway transactions
> >> will also be discarded and may cause system or application failures. By
> >> that time, the binder debug information we dump may not be relevant to
> >> the root cause. And this issue is difficult to debug if without the
> >> backtrace of the thread sending spam.
> >>
> >> This change will send BR_ONEWAY_SPAM_SUSPECT to userspace when oneway
> >> spamming is detected, request to dump current backtrace. Oneway spamming
> >> will be reported only once when exceeding the threshold (target process
> >> dips below 80% of its oneway space, and current process is responsible for
> >> either more than 50 transactions, or more than 50% of the oneway space).
> >> And the detection will restart when the async buffer has returned to a
> >> healthy state.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Hang Lu <hangl@codeaurora.org>
> >> ---
> >> v4: add missing BR_FROZEN_REPLY in binder_return_strings and change the size of binder_stats.br array
> > 
> > Should the BR_FROZEN_REPLY string be a separate patch as it's a fix for
> > the "binder frozen feature", not this new feature, right?  Or does this
> > patch require that change and the frozen patch did not?
> 
> Yes, BR_FROZEN_REPLY string is a fix and seems should to be separated from this new feature. But I'm still wondering how to submit these 2 separate patches as they edit the same place(maybe merge conflict). Do you know which of the following two commit methods is more suitable? Thanks!
> 
> 1. char-misc-next HEAD --> BR_FROZEN_REPLY fix patch --> new feature patch

Yes, do it this way, a 2 patch series is fine.

thanks,

greg k-h