Re: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 12/26] Uprobes: Handle breakpoint and Singlestep
From: Srikar Dronamraju <hidden>
Date: 2011-09-26 16:16:56
Also in:
lkml
* Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref] [2011-09-26 15:59:13]:
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 17:32 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:quoted
Hence provide some extra + * time (by way of synchronize_sched() for breakpoint hit threads to acquire + * the uprobes_treelock before the uprobe is removed from the rbtree.'Some extra time' doesn't make me all warm an fuzzy inside, but instead screams we fudge around a race condition.
The extra time provided is sufficient to avoid the race. So will modify it to mean "sufficient" instead of "some". Would that suffice? -- Thanks and Regards Srikar -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>