From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751253AbdJDTuV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:50:21 -0400
Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:46555 "EHLO mga05.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750797AbdJDTuU (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:50:20 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,478,1500966000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="156763244"
Message-ID: <1507146618.14461.21.camel@tzanussi-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 21/33] tracing: Add support for 'synthetic' events
From: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mhiramat@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org,
        vedang.patel@intel.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de, joel.opensrc@gmail.com,
        joelaf@google.com, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
        baohong.liu@intel.com, rajvi.jingar@intel.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2017 14:50:18 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20171004140816.64eaa140@gandalf.local.home>
References: <cover.1506105131.git.tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
         <779b69521d09ef0b4228170e9a7c0425f1b1e32d.1506105131.git.tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
         <20171004140816.64eaa140@gandalf.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 14:08 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:00:01 -0500
> Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > +/* This function releases synth_event_mutex */
> > +static int unregister_synth_event(struct synth_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	struct trace_event_call *call = &event->call;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	mutex_unlock(&synth_event_mutex);
> > +	ret = trace_remove_event_call(call);
> > +	mutex_lock(&synth_event_mutex);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int remove_synth_event(struct synth_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	int ret = unregister_synth_event(event);
> > +
> > +	if (!ret)
> > +		list_del(&event->list);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> 
> 
> > +/* This function releases synth_event_mutex */
> > +static int release_all_synth_events(void)
> > +{
> > +	struct synth_event *event, *e;
> > +	int ret = 0;
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(&synth_event_mutex);
> > +
> > +	list_for_each_entry(event, &synth_event_list, list) {
> > +		if (event->ref) {
> > +			ret = -EBUSY;
> > +			goto out;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	list_for_each_entry_safe(event, e, &synth_event_list, list) {
> 
> remove_synth_event() releases synth_event_mutex, which is racy, as more
> than one instance can do the deletion.
> 
> Perhaps we should remove all the events off the synth_event_list under
> the lock, release the lock, and then remove the trace events attached
> to them?
> 

Yeah, I think that makes sense, will change..

Thanks,

Tom

> -- Steve
> 
> 
> > +		ret = remove_synth_event(event);
> > +		if (!ret)
> > +			free_synth_event(event);
> > +	}
> > + out:
> > +	mutex_unlock(&synth_event_mutex);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +