(2013/07/03 8:02), Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sun, 2013-06-30 at 16:46 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> (2013/06/29 3:43), Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>> On 06/28, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 16:27 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ah, but this conflicts with the other changes I sent. They have >>>>> your acks, and iiuc Steven is going to apply them. >>>> >>>> I'll see if I can solve any conflicts. I need to get my -rt versions out >>>> and start on the new 3.6 stable today. Then after that, I plan on going >>>> though and getting all the tracing patches settled. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>>>> Besides, this fix is not complete afaics, we should also clear >>>>> TP_FLAG_TRACE/PROFILE if __enable_trace_probe() fails. >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> And I forgot to mention, until we fix the races we discuss in another >>> thread, this WARN_ON() doesn't look right. So perhaps it would be >>> really better to delay this change a bit. >> >> Agreed, this fix is not a critical one. The racing problem of >> dynamic events is what we have to solve at first. >> > > Do you want to reapply this on top of my current for-next branch? Or can > this wait?
This is a minor one (and must not happen), and AFAICS fixing all the problem around this requires more works i.e. exporting event_mutex etc.(as I said) I'll do that asap. :) Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology 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/
