[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1375279617.19999.1.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:06:57 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [for-next-3.11][PATCH 0/8] ftrace/tracing: Event file fixes and
ftrace function hash fixes
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 13:47 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/30, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > Using the i_private and event_mutex
> > to verify that the event still exists to solve the race.
>
> To remind, we also need the "debugfs: debugfs_remove_recursive() must
> not rely on list_empty(d_subdirs)" patch, otherwise we still have the
> problems with the opened files.
Do these patches depend on that patch? Should I rebase to have that
patch first?
-- Steve
>
> Just in case, we need this fix even if .open() does trace_array_get()
> or tracing_open_generic_file() (removed by recent changes), rmdir can
> be called before we increment the counter and the deleted dentry breaks
> debugfs_remove_recursive().
>
> But after the recent changes this fix becomes more important. An opened
> file confuses debugfs_remove_recursive() and after that you can't create
> another probe.
--
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