[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130327131532.GL30540@8bytes.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:15:32 +0100
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code:
asm/8267
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 07:34:52PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 7b4a55d41efc..f3bb3384a106 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -4455,8 +4455,11 @@ static void perf_event_task_event(struct perf_task_event *task_event)
> next:
> put_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context);
> }
> +
> + preempt_disable();
> if (task_event->task_ctx)
> perf_event_task_ctx(task_event->task_ctx, task_event);
> + preempt_enable();
>
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
What makes me wonder here is that the code is preemptible in an
rcu_read_locked section. As far as I know preemption needs to be
disabled while holding the rcu_read_lock().
Joerg
--
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