Re: Q: perf_install_in_context/perf_event_enable are racy?
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Thu Jan 27 2011 - 12:07:45 EST
On 01/27, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 17:10 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > #ifdef __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW
> > > local_irq_enable();
> > > + rq->in_ctxsw = 0;
> > If we think that context_switch finishes here, probably it would be
> > more clean to clear ->in_ctxsw before local_irq_enable().
> It must in fact be done before,
Yes, I alredy realized this when I was reading another email from you.
> > But, otoh, maybe finish_lock_switch() can clear in_ctxsw, it already
> > checks __ARCH_WANT_INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW. Likewise, perhaps it can be
> > set in prepare_lock_switch() which enables irqs.
> > But this is cosmetic and up to you.
> Can't do because of the above thing..
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/