On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 03:02:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:43:59PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 01:18:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 01:56:19PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > From: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > When task exits we close: > > > > 1) all events that are installed in task > > > > 2) all events owned by task (via file descriptor) > > > > > > > > But we don't close children events of 2) events. Those children > > > > events stay until the child task exits and are useless with the > > > > parent being gone, because we have no way to get to values any > > > > more. > > > > > > > > Plus if the event stays installed in task even with the owner task > > > > gone, it runs the perf callback any time the task forks, for no > > > > real reason. > > > > > > > > Closing all children events events when the owner task of the > > > > parent event is closed. > > > > > > Do we need this for the other patches, or is this an unrelated change? > > > > if we dont do it, the event stays installed without owner and > > perf fork callback will be called and fail on permission checking > > (because of owner == NULL) ... so yes, I think it's needed > > Oh, right. Alternatively, we don't need permission checking for inherits > at all, if we're allowed to create the initial event, we should be good > for inherits.
I could adress that in follow up patch.. or you want this instead of this one? IMO we should close those events anyway.. jirka -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
