From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ia64 <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>,
systemtap-ml <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] kprobes: kprobe-booster for ia64
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:17:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D6CCAA.7020506@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1205198417.24178.10.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Hi Shaohua,
Shaohua Li wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 02:25 +0800, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Shaohua Li wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 00:01 +0800, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> There is no lock to protect the flag. If one cpu invokes other_kp
>> and
>>> the other cpu is changing the flag, what's the result?
>> I think that other cpu never change the flag, because the caller of
>> this
>> function(__register_kprobe) locks kprobe_mutex in kernel/kprobes.c.
> I mean if one cpu is doing register_kprobe, which will change other_kp's
> flag. Another cpu is running into other_kp's break point, which will
> look at the flag, there is a window (between the second cpu looks at the
> flag and doing boost) the first cpu can change the flag in the window.
> It appears we will lose one probe, but not sure if this is over
> thinking.
Sure, it is possible to lose just one probe in that time, but in next time,
we do not lose it. So, I think it is not a problem.
Thanks,
--
Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ia64 <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>,
systemtap-ml <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] kprobes: kprobe-booster for ia64
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:17:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D6CCAA.7020506@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1205198417.24178.10.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Hi Shaohua,
Shaohua Li wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 02:25 +0800, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Shaohua Li wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 00:01 +0800, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> There is no lock to protect the flag. If one cpu invokes other_kp
>> and
>>> the other cpu is changing the flag, what's the result?
>> I think that other cpu never change the flag, because the caller of
>> this
>> function(__register_kprobe) locks kprobe_mutex in kernel/kprobes.c.
> I mean if one cpu is doing register_kprobe, which will change other_kp's
> flag. Another cpu is running into other_kp's break point, which will
> look at the flag, there is a window (between the second cpu looks at the
> flag and doing boost) the first cpu can change the flag in the window.
> It appears we will lose one probe, but not sure if this is over
> thinking.
Sure, it is possible to lose just one probe in that time, but in next time,
we do not lose it. So, I think it is not a problem.
Thanks,
--
Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-11 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-07 16:01 [PATCH -mm] kprobes: kprobe-booster for ia64 Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-07 16:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-10 3:43 ` Shaohua Li
2008-03-10 3:43 ` Shaohua Li
2008-03-10 18:25 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-10 18:25 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-11 0:06 ` [PATCH -mm] kprobes: fix prepare_booster to get correct slot Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-11 0:06 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-03-11 1:20 ` [PATCH -mm] kprobes: kprobe-booster for ia64 Shaohua Li
2008-03-11 1:20 ` Shaohua Li
2008-03-11 18:17 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2008-03-11 18:17 ` Masami Hiramatsu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47D6CCAA.7020506@redhat.com \
--to=mhiramat@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.