On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 3:38 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > > index 48db147c6c7d..1f3d4b72a3f2 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > > @@ -2797,7 +2797,7 @@ kprobe_multi_link_prog_run(struct bpf_kprobe_multi_link *link,
> > >
> > > if (unlikely(__this_cpu_inc_return(bpf_prog_active) != 1)) {
> > > bpf_prog_inc_misses_counter(link->link.prog);
> > > - err = 0;
> > > + err = 1;
> >
> > nit: Shall we return -EBUSY or some other error code?
>
> it's processed in __fprobe_handler and it's treated as bool, so technically
> it does not matter.. but I'd rather keep the 0/1 return values in here,
> because it's what the session program is forced to return
Got it. Thanks for the explanation.
Song
