On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:09 +0000 Vincent Donnefort <vdonnef...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > What needs to be done, and feel free to add this as a separate patch, > > is to have checks where snapshot is used. > > > > (All errors return -EBUSY) > > > > Before allowing mapping, check to see if: > > > > 1) the current tracer has "use_max_tr" set. > > 2) any event has a "snapshot" trigger set > > 3) Any function has a "snapshot" command set > > Could we sum-up this with a single check to allocate_snapshot? If that is > allocated it's probably because we'll be using it? Not always. It can be allocated at any time and never used. I'd like to keep the allocation of the snapshot buffer agnostic to if the buffer is mapped or not, especially since it can be allocated at boot up and never used. Several of my boxes have "alloc_snapshot" on the command line even though I don't always use it. But we could update the output of reading the "snapshot" file to: ~# cat /sys/kernel/tracing/snapshot # tracer: nop # # # ** Snapshot disabled due to the buffer being memory mapped ** # # * Snapshot is freed * # # Snapshot commands: # echo 0 > snapshot : Clears and frees snapshot buffer # echo 1 > snapshot : Allocates snapshot buffer, if not already allocated. # Takes a snapshot of the main buffer. # echo 2 > snapshot : Clears snapshot buffer (but does not allocate or free) # (Doesn't have to be '2' works with any number that # is not a '0' or '1') If it is allocated: ~# cat /sys/kernel/tracing/snapshot # tracer: nop # # ** Snapshot disabled due to the buffer being memory mapped ** # # * Snapshot is allocated * # # Snapshot commands: # echo 0 > snapshot : Clears and frees snapshot buffer # echo 1 > snapshot : Allocates snapshot buffer, if not already allocated. # Takes a snapshot of the main buffer. # echo 2 > snapshot : Clears snapshot buffer (but does not allocate or free) # (Doesn't have to be '2' works with any number that # is not a '0' or '1') > > That would simply add the requirement to echo 0 > snapshot before starting the > memory map? I rather not depend on that. It just makes it more complex for why mapping failed. If you get -EBUSY, it will be hard to know why. > > The opposite could be to let tracing_alloc_snapshot_instance() fail whenever a > mapping is in place? Yes, that would fail if mapping is in place. Because the snapshot being allocated can be something people want, as it allows the snapshot to happen immediately when needed, I don't want the fact that it is allocated to prevent mapping. As mapping may just happen for a small period of time while an application is running. -- Steve
