[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130419072250.GA20897@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:22:50 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip ] [BUGFIX] kprobes: Fix a double lock bug of
kprobe_mutex
* Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 06:33:18PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Fix a double locking bug caused when debug.kprobe-optimization=0.
> > While the proc_kprobes_optimization_handler locks kprobe_mutex,
> > wait_for_kprobe_optimizer locks it again and that causes a double lock.
> > To fix the bug, this introduces different mutex for protecting
> > sysctl parameter and locks it in proc_kprobes_optimization_handler.
> > Of course, since we need to lock kprobe_mutex when touching kprobes
> > resources, that is done in *optimize_all_kprobes().
> >
> > This bug was from ad72b3bea744b4db01c89af0f86f3e8920d354df
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
> > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
>
> Oops,
>
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Since you pushed the original commit, mind pushing this fix to Linus too?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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