[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51BFD6EF.1060805@hitachi.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:41:35 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 2/3] tracing/kprobes: Kill probe_enable_lock
(2013/06/18 0:18), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> because
>> those calls are the reason why I have introduced this lock.
>
> Please do not hesitate to nack this patch if you think that we should
> keep probe_enable_lock for safety even if it is not currently needed.
> In this case I'd suggest to move lock/unlock into kprobe_register()
> but this is minor.
Oh, I agree with removing probe_enable_lock itself :)
I just concerned only about the exceptional case of __init test
function, which can mislead someone to use enable/disable_trace_probe
at other racy point.
Thank you,
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
--
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