[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130703231114.GA18261@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 01:11:14 +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 07/03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 16:34 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > OK, what about the below patch, followed by an updated version of your
> > patch. I'll send that as a reply to this one.
>
> This is a modification of your patch:
Thanks.
> If you like it, please add a proper change log and SOB tag. Oh, and we
> need to still update trace_kprobes.c
and trace_uprobes.c. Please find the changelog below.
tracing: trace_remove_event_call() should fail if call/file is in use
Change trace_remove_event_call(call) to return the error if this
call is active. This is what the callers assume but can't verify
outside of the tracing locks. Both trace_kprobe.c/trace_uprobe.c
need the additional changes, unregister_trace_probe() should abort
if trace_remove_event_call() fails.
We also check TRACE_EVENT_FL_REF_MASK to ensure that nobody opened
the files we are going to remove, these means that nobody can access
the soon-to-be-freed ftrace_event_file/call via filp->private_data.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.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