(2014/07/03 16:44), Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Masami, > > On Thu, 03 Jul 2014 14:46:09 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> One possible scenario is here; someone disables an event and tries to remove >> it (both will be done by different syscalls). If we don't synchronize >> the first disabling, the event flag set disabled, but the event itself >> is not disabled. Thus event handler is still possible to be running >> somewhere when it is removed. > > But, IIUC both of disable and remove path are protected by event_mutex. > So one cannot see the case of disabled event flag but enabled event, no?
No, the flag is not protect the trace event handler itself. I meant that running handlers and the flag was not synchronized. Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
