Re: [PATCH 2/3] ftrace: use struct pid

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Thu Dec 04 2008 - 10:45:06 EST

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >
> > We probably should. Historically read_lock(&tasklist_lock) implies
> > rcu_read_lock(). And the tasklist lock is what we hold when it is
> > safe.
> So, Dipankar tells me that you really do need rcu_read_lock/unlock() for
> the guarantee here; the tasklist lock is not sufficient. The realtime
> kernel will preempt even those sections covered by spinlocks.

Yes it will.

-- Steve

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at