From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1757452AbcJXL3x (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2016 07:29:53 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:39983 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1757421AbcJXL3q (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2016 07:29:46 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:29:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Ni, BaoleX" <baolex.ni@intel.com>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com" 
        <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        "Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: hit a KASan bug related to Perf during stress test
Message-ID: <20161024112945.GI3157@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <318B87A793BE164187D8851D6CE09D64371C8811@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20161024095341.GF3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20161024111526.GA13509@redhat.com>
 <20161024112732.GJ3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161024112732.GJ3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:27:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:15:27PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > How about the trivial fix below?
> > 
> > Oleg.
> > 
> > --- x/kernel/events/core.c
> > +++ x/kernel/events/core.c
> > @@ -1257,7 +1257,7 @@ static u32 perf_event_pid(struct perf_ev
> >  	if (event->parent)
> >  		event = event->parent;
> >  
> > -	return task_tgid_nr_ns(p, event->ns);
> > +	return pid_alive(p) ? task_tgid_nr_ns(p, event->ns) : 0;
> >  }
> 
> Also, now we get a (few) sample(s) with a different pid:tid than prior
> samples and not matching the sched_switch() events.
> 
> I can imagine that being somewhat confusing for people/tools.
> 
> Acme/Jolsa, any idea if that will bugger perf-report?

Hurm, then again, I imagine that after unhash_process the PID/TID could
be instantly re-used and then we're still confused.

Yuck.