[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090331234823.GB28228@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:48:23 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Markus Metzger <markus.t.metzger@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
hpa@...or.com, markus.t.metzger@...il.com, roland@...hat.com,
eranian@...glemail.com, juan.villacis@...el.com,
ak@...ux.jf.intel.com
Subject: Re: [patch 1/21] x86, bts: fix race when bts tracer is removed
On 03/31, Markus Metzger wrote:
>
> Read the tracer once during a context switch.
> ...
> @@ -1044,36 +1051,39 @@ void ds_switch_to(struct task_struct *pr
> {
> struct ds_context *prev_ctx = prev->thread.ds_ctx;
> struct ds_context *next_ctx = next->thread.ds_ctx;
> + unsigned long debugctlmsr = next->thread.debugctlmsr;
>
> if (prev_ctx) {
> + struct bts_tracer *tracer = prev_ctx->bts_master;
> +
> update_debugctlmsr(0);
>
> - if (prev_ctx->bts_master &&
> - (prev_ctx->bts_master->trace.ds.flags & BTS_TIMESTAMPS)) {
> + if (tracer && (tracer->flags & BTS_TIMESTAMPS)) {
In theory, we need barrier() after reading ->bts_master.
(actually, I did see the bug reports when the compiler read the pointer
twice with the code like above).
Off-topic, but afaics modulo bts_task_departs/bts_task_arrives we
have the identical code for prev_ctx/next_ctx, perhaps it makes
sense to make a helper which calls bts_write().
To clarify, even _if_ I am right and _if_ you agree, we can do this
later, I am not suggesting to change this patch right now.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists