[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180927201559.GH28040@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 13:15:59 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/5] perf: Allow per PMU access control
> + mutex_lock(&pmus_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(pmu, &pmus, entry)
> + pmu->perf_event_paranoid = sysctl_perf_event_paranoid;
> + mutex_unlock(&pmus_lock);
What happens to pmus that got added later?
The rest looks good.
Can you post a non RFC version?
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists