On 11/23, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Masami Hiramatsu<mhiramat@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
These patches add signal related tracepoints including
signal generation, delivery, and loss. First patch also
moves signal-sending tracepoint from events/sched.h to
events/signal.h.
Changes in v3
- Add Docbook style comments
Changes in v2
- Add siginfo arguments
Thank you,
---
Masami Hiramatsu (3):
tracepoint: Add signal loss events
tracepoint: Add signal deliver event
tracepoint: Move signal sending tracepoint to events/signal.h
Documentation/DocBook/tracepoint.tmpl | 5 +
include/trace/events/sched.h | 25 -----
include/trace/events/signal.h | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/signal.c | 27 ++++-
4 files changed, 198 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 include/trace/events/signal.h
Would be nice to have Roland's and Oleg's Acked-by tags in the patches -
to show that this is a representative and useful looking set of signal
events.
Sorry, I can't really comment these patches.
I mean, I do not know which info is useful and which is not.
For example, I am a bit surprized we report trace_signal_lose_info()
but please do not consider this as if I think we shouldn't. Just I
do not know.
OTOH, we do not report if __send_signal() fails just because the
legacy signal is already queued. We do not report who sends the signal,
we do not report if it was private or shared. zap_process, complete_signal
can "send" SIGKILL via sigaddset, this won't be noticed. But again, it is
not that I think this should be reported.
In short: I think any info may be useful, and these patches can help.
But I do not understand what exactly should be reported to userspace.