Re: [PATCH 1/3] tracing/user_events: Fix incorrect return value for writing operation when events are disabled

From: Beau Belgrave
Date: Thu Jun 08 2023 - 13:19:38 EST


On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 09:15:52AM +0800, sunliming wrote:
> The writing operation return the count of writes whether events are
> enabled or disabled. This is incorrect when events are disabled. Fix
> this by just return -EFAULT when events are disabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: sunliming <sunliming@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> index 1ac5ba5685ed..970bac0503fd 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> @@ -1957,7 +1957,8 @@ static ssize_t user_events_write_core(struct file *file, struct iov_iter *i)
>
> if (unlikely(faulted))
> return -EFAULT;
> - }
> + } else
> + return -EFAULT;
>

I'm not sure this is a good idea. Imagine this scenario:
A user process writes out a user_event and it hits a fault that gets
returned as errno (EFAULT).

The user process is likely to either forget it and say, not worth
retrying, or it will retry (potentially in a loop).

If the process does retry and it's now disabled, it might try many
times.

I think that -ENOENT is a better error to use here. That way a user
process will know it got disabled mid-write vs a fault that might want
to be re-attempted.

Thanks,
-Beau

> return ret;
> }
> --
> 2.25.1