lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: PATCH? trace_remove_event_call() should fail if call is active
From
Date
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 00:18 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > No, I would avoid any changes to the debugfs infrastructure.
>
> YEs, agreed.
>
> > OK, what about the below patch, followed by an updated version of your
> > patch. I'll send that as a reply to this one.
>
> Steven, you do understand that I can't review the changes in this area.

I have more faith in you than you do ;-)

>
> But at first glance, _I think_ this should work. And this is much simpler,
> ->open() blocks trace_remove_event_call() (you added TRACE_EVENT_FL_REF_MASK
> check into the next patch).

Yep.

>
> Which tree this patch is based on? I have pulled linux-trace.git#for-next
> and I do not see tracing_open_generic_file/etc in trace_events.c.

Ug! Thanks! I posted my [for-next] series but never pushed it to my git
tree. I just pushed it now. I'm glad you told me this because I was
under the assumption that the code was already in my kernel.org repo,
and I would have pushed to Linus thinking it was already in linux-next
and would have been embarrassed if something went wrong.

>
> I do not understand what protects call->flags, I guess there is another
> lock which I do not see in my tree?

Those flags should only be set under the event_mutex lock. But I see I
didn't do that :-) Yeah, I need to add locks for that.

See, you can review my patch and provide valuable feedback!

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-04 02:41    [W:0.105 / U:0.624 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site