Re: PATCH? trace_remove_event_call() should fail if call is active
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Wed Jul 03 2013 - 20:21:52 EST
On Thu, 2013年07月04日 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/