[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130702214109.GA25633@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 23:41:09 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH? trace_remove_event_call() should fail if call is active
On 07/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 07/02, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > I'm actually worried about this change.
>
> Me too.
>
> But again. Any reason trace_remove_event_call() should succeed if
> this this ftrace_event_call is active?
And note that kprobes/uprobes are the only users of trace_remove_event_call(),
and both need the same semantics: kill it only if it is not active.
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