On 09/09, Jiri Olsa wrote:
handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
{
+ struct return_consumer *ric = NULL;
struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe;
struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
- int srcu_idx;
+ int srcu_idx, iter = 0;
srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+ /*
+ * If we don't find return consumer, it means uprobe consumer
+ * was added after we hit uprobe and return consumer did not
+ * get registered in which case we call the ret_handler only
+ * if it's not session consumer.
+ */
+ ric = return_consumer_find(ri, &iter, uc->id);
+ if (!ric && uc->session)
+ continue;
if (uc->ret_handler)
- uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs);
+ uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs, ric ? &ric->cookie : NULL);
So why do we need the new uc->session member and the uc->session above ?
If return_consumer_find() returns NULL, uc->ret_handler(..., NULL) can handle
this case itself?
Oleg.