We need to ensure the enabled=0 write happens before we start disabling the actual counters, so that a pcm_amd_enable() will not enable one underneath us. I think the race is impossible anyway, we always balance the ops within any one context and perform enable() with IRQs disabled. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra --- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c @@ -247,6 +247,10 @@ static u64 pmc_amd_save_disable_all(void enabled = cpuc->enabled; cpuc->enabled = 0; + /* + * ensure we write the disable before we start disabling the + * counters proper, so that pcm_amd_enable() does the right thing. + */ barrier(); for (idx = 0; idx < nr_counters_generic; idx++) { -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/