)]}'
{
  "commit": "9da79ab83ee33ddc1fdd0858fd3d70925a1bde99",
  "tree": "116f9d3c256a91ede964ebbfd3779949cc5953d4",
  "parents": [
    "b83f920e179101a54721e5ab1d6c3edfb9d4bcbb"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Srikar Dronamraju",
    "email": "srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com",
    "time": "Wed Jun 30 14:15:48 2010 +0530"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo",
    "email": "acme@redhat.com",
    "time": "Wed Aug 04 12:41:23 2010 -0300"
  },
  "message": "tracing/kprobes: unregister_trace_probe needs to be called under mutex\n\nComment in unregister_trace_probe() says probe_lock will be held when it\ngets called. However there is a case where it might called without the\nprobe_lock being held. Also since we are traversing the probe_list and\ndeleting an element from the probe_list, probe_lock should be held.\n\nThis was first pointed in uprobes traceevent review by Frederic\nWeisbecker here.  (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/12/106)\n\nCc: Ingo Molnar \u003cmingo@elte.hu\u003e\nCc: Masami Hiramatsu \u003cmasami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com\u003e\nAcked-by: Masami Hiramatsu \u003cmasami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com\u003e\nAcked-by: Steven Rostedt \u003crostedt@goodmis.org\u003e\nLKML-Reference: \u003c20100630084548.GA10325@linux.vnet.ibm.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju \u003csrikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo \u003cacme@redhat.com\u003e\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "1b79d1c15726b03f6a0abfe55b340c7cd9860767",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c",
      "new_id": "8b27c9849b427905ea9a5ef83864a88526afe405",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c"
    }
  ]
}