| Message ID | 1489738592-61011-1-git-send-email-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 70946723eeb859466f026274b29c6196e39149c4 |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:16:32 +0800 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> wrote: > On old perf, when using perf probe -d to delete an inexistent event, > it return errno, eg, > > -bash-4.3# perf probe -d xxx || echo $? > Info: Event "*:xxx" does not exist. > Error: Failed to delete events. > 255 > > But now perf_del_probe_events() will always set ret = 0, different > from previous del_perf_probe_events(). After this, it return errno > again, eg, > > -bash-4.3# ./perf probe -d xxx || echo $? > "xxx" does not hit any event. > Error: Failed to delete events. > 254 > > And it is more appropriate to return -ENOENT instead of -EPERM. Looks good to me. Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> Thanks! > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> > Cc: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com> > > Fixes: dddc7ee32fa1 ("perf probe: Fix an error when deleting probes successfully") > Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> > --- > > v1->v2: > - Using pr_wanring to show warning infos and drop inappropriate comment > suggested by Masami Hiramatsu. > > tools/perf/builtin-probe.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c b/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c > index 1fcebc3..51cdc23 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c > @@ -442,9 +442,9 @@ static int perf_del_probe_events(struct strfilter *filter) > } > > if (ret == -ENOENT && ret2 == -ENOENT) > - pr_debug("\"%s\" does not hit any event.\n", str); > - /* Note that this is silently ignored */ > - ret = 0; > + pr_warning("\"%s\" does not hit any event.\n", str); > + else > + ret = 0; > > error: > if (kfd >= 0) > -- > 1.7.12.4 > -- Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Em Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:23:02AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:16:32 +0800 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> wrote: > > And it is more appropriate to return -ENOENT instead of -EPERM. > Looks good to me. > Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> Thanks, applied. - Arnaldo
diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c b/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c index 1fcebc3..51cdc23 100644 --- a/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-probe.c @@ -442,9 +442,9 @@ static int perf_del_probe_events(struct strfilter *filter) } if (ret == -ENOENT && ret2 == -ENOENT) - pr_debug("\"%s\" does not hit any event.\n", str); - /* Note that this is silently ignored */ - ret = 0; + pr_warning("\"%s\" does not hit any event.\n", str); + else + ret = 0; error: if (kfd >= 0)
On old perf, when using perf probe -d to delete an inexistent event, it return errno, eg, -bash-4.3# perf probe -d xxx || echo $? Info: Event "*:xxx" does not exist. Error: Failed to delete events. 255 But now perf_del_probe_events() will always set ret = 0, different from previous del_perf_probe_events(). After this, it return errno again, eg, -bash-4.3# ./perf probe -d xxx || echo $? "xxx" does not hit any event. Error: Failed to delete events. 254 And it is more appropriate to return -ENOENT instead of -EPERM. Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com> Fixes: dddc7ee32fa1 ("perf probe: Fix an error when deleting probes successfully") Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> --- v1->v2: - Using pr_wanring to show warning infos and drop inappropriate comment suggested by Masami Hiramatsu. tools/perf/builtin-probe.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) -- 1.7.12.4