* Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2025 16:39:56 -0700
> Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 01:27:20PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 May 2025 18:34:35 -0400
> > > Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This has modifications in x86 and I would like it to go through the x86
> > > > tree. Preferably it can go into this merge window so we can focus on
> > > > getting
> > > > perf and ftrace to work on top of this.
> > >
> > > I think it may be best for me to remove the two x86 specific patches, and
> > > rebuild the ftrace work on top of it. For testing, I'll just keep those
> > > two
> > > patches in my tree locally, but then I can get this moving for this merge
> > > window.
> >
> > Maybe I asked this before but I don't remember if I got the answer. :)
> > How does it handle task exits as it won't go to userspace? I guess it'll
> > lose user callstacks for exit syscalls and other termination paths.
> >
> > Similarly, it will miss user callstacks in the samples at the end of
> > profiling if the target tasks remain in the kernel (or they sleep).
> > It looks like a fundamental limitation of the deferred callchains.
> >
>
> Ah, I think I forgot about that. I believe the exit path can also be a
> faultable path. All it needs is a hook to do the exit. Is there any
> "task work" clean up on exit? I need to take a look.
Could you please not rush this facility into v6.16? It barely had any
design review so far, and I'm still not entirely sure about the
approach.
Thanks,
Ingo
