Re: Q: perf_install_in_context/perf_event_enable are racy?

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 19:49 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 01/26, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Please see the untested patch below. It doesn't change perf_event_enable(),
> > only perf_install_in_context().
> 
> Forgot to mention... Also, it doesn't try to fix the race with do_exit(),
> this needs another change.
> 
> And, damn, can't resist. This is mostly cosmetic issue, but I feel
> discomfort every time I look at task_oncpu_function_call(). It _looks_
> obviously wrong, even if the problem doesn't exist in practice. I'll
> send the pedantic fix to keep the maintainers busy ;)

I've been trying to sit down and work my way through it today, your last
suggestion very nearly seemed to make sense, but I kept getting
distracted.

FWIW I think perf_event_enable() has the very same issue...
--
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/