lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf: Differentiate exec() and non-exec() comm events
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:45:04AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> perf tools like 'perf report' can aggregate samples by comm
> strings, which generally works. However, there are other
> potential use-cases. For example, to pair up 'calls'
> with 'returns' accurately (from branch events like Intel BTS)
> it is necessary to identify whether the process has exec'd.
> Although a comm event is generated when an 'exec' happens
> it is also generated whenever the comm string is changed
> on a whim (e.g. by prctl PR_SET_NAME). This patch adds a
> flag to the comm event to differentiate one case from the
> other.
>
> In order to determine whether the kernel supports the new
> flag, a selection bit named 'exec' is added to struct
> perf_event_attr. The bit does nothing but will cause
> perf_event_open() to fail if the bit is set on kernels
> that do not have it defined.
>

> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -302,8 +302,8 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
> exclude_callchain_kernel : 1, /* exclude kernel callchains */
> exclude_callchain_user : 1, /* exclude user callchains */
> mmap2 : 1, /* include mmap with inode data */
> -
> - __reserved_1 : 40;
> + exec : 1, /* flag comm events that are due to an exec */
> + __reserved_1 : 39;
>

Yah.. that's just sad :-(

the only capabilities mask we have is in the mmap() page, so without
mmap()ing we have no way to test that.

Would it make sense to call it comm_exec?
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-28 11:21    [W:0.047 / U:0.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site