Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:38:57 +0530 | From | Srikar Dronamraju <> | Subject | Re: [Bugfix] unregister_trace_probe needs to be called under mutex |
| |
Ingo,
Any particular reason to not pick this patch?
Steven Rostedt and Masami Hiramatsu agree that this patch needs to be pushed in.
-- Thanks and Regards Srikar
> Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > Comment in unregister_trace_probe() says probe_lock will be held > > when it gets called. However there is a case where it might called > > without the probe_lock being held. Also since we are traversing the > > probe_list and deleting an element from the probe_list, probe_lock > > should be held. > > > > This was first pointed in uprobes traceevent review by Frederic > > Weisbecker here. (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/12/106) > > > > This patch is needed for both 2.6.35-rc3 and 2.6.35-rc3-tip > > > > Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Ah, right! That's definately needed. > > Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com> > > Thank you! > > > > --- > > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c > > index 4f11a56..67670cd 100644 > > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c > > @@ -269,14 +269,17 @@ static int create_trace_probe(int argc, char **argv) > > pr_info("Delete command needs an event name.\n"); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > + mutex_lock(&probe_lock); > > tp = find_probe_event(event, group); > > if (!tp) { > > + mutex_unlock(&probe_lock); > > pr_info("Event %s/%s doesn't exist.\n", group, event); > > return -ENOENT; > > } > > /* delete an event */ > > unregister_trace_probe(tp); > > free_trace_probe(tp); > > + mutex_unlock(&probe_lock); > > return 0; > > } > > >
| |