From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not warn on EEXIST or ENOENT
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 19:35:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210626193540.706da950@rorschach.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1252314758.18555.1624732969232.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 14:42:49 -0400 (EDT)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > If BPF is OK with registering the same probe more than once if user
> > space expects it, we can add this patch, which allows the caller (in
> > this case BPF) to not warn if the probe being registered is already
> > registered, and keeps the idea that a probe registered twice is a bug
> > for all other use cases.
>
> How can removal of the duplicates be non buggy then ? The first removal will match both probes.
The registering of the first duplicate would fail with an error, but
will not warn. There would be no unregistering needed.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-26 23:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20210626135845.4080-1-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
2021-06-26 14:18 ` [PATCH] tracepoint: Do not warn on EEXIST or ENOENT Steven Rostedt
2021-06-26 15:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
2021-06-26 15:17 ` Tetsuo Handa
2021-06-26 15:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-26 18:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-26 18:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2021-06-26 23:35 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2021-06-27 1:10 ` Tetsuo Handa
2021-06-27 2:52 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210626193540.706da950@rorschach.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=krisman@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rric@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).