On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 09:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 01:59:10PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 22:05 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > >
> > > What is that commit id so it can be properly referenced in the patch
> > > below? And what tree should this patch go into? .39? 3.0? Anything
> > > newer?
> >
> > .32+ in as far as anybody is still maintaining them, if it fails to
> > apply to any of them (quite possible) do tell and I can provide
> > backports etc..
>
> I've applied it to 3.0, and it didn't apply to any older kernel due to
> file movements, so if you could, can you provide a version for
> .32-stable?
---
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijls...@chello.nl>
The below patch is for -stable only, upstream has a much larger patch
that contains the below hunk in commit a8b0ca17b80e92faab46ee7179ba9e99ccb61233
Vince found that under certain circumstances software event overflows
go wrong and deadlock. Avoid trying to delete a timer from the timer
callback.
Reported-by: Vince Weaver <vweav...@eecs.utk.edu>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijls...@chello.nl>
---
kernel/perf_event.c | 8 ++------
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/perf_event.c b/kernel/perf_event.c
index 183d437..8f97aea 100644
--- a/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -3693,12 +3693,8 @@ static int __perf_event_overflow(struct perf_event
*event, int nmi,
if (events && atomic_dec_and_test(&event->event_limit)) {
ret = 1;
event->pending_kill = POLL_HUP;
- if (nmi) {
- event->pending_disable = 1;
- perf_pending_queue(&event->pending,
- perf_pending_event);
- } else
- perf_event_disable(event);
+ event->pending_disable = 1;
+ perf_pending_queue(&event->pending, perf_pending_event);
}
perf_event_output(event, nmi, data, regs);
_______________________________________________
stable mailing list
stable@linux.kernel.org
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
