| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 16:59:18 +0100 From: Joao Correia <joaomiguelcorreia@...il.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 16:50 +0100, Joao Correia wrote: > >> >> Yes. Anything 2.6.31 forward triggers this immediatly during init >> >> process, at random places. >> > >> > Not on my machines it doesn't.. so I suspect its something weird in >> > your .config or maybe due to some hardware you have that I don't that >> > triggers different drivers or somesuch. >> >> I am not the only one reporting this, and it happens, for example, >> with a stock .config from a Fedora 11 install. >> >> It may, of course, be a funny driver interaction yes, but other than >> stripping the box piece by piece, how would one go about debugging >> this otherwise? > > One thing to do is stare (or share) at the output > of /proc/lockdep_chains and see if there's some particularly large > chains in there, or many of the same name or something. > > /proc/lockdep_stats might also be interesting, mine reads like: > > [root@...eron ~]# cat /proc/lockdep_stats > lock-classes: 641 [max: 8191] > direct dependencies: 3794 [max: 16384] > indirect dependencies: 7557 > all direct dependencies: 73254 > dependency chains: 3716 [max: 32768] > dependency chain hlocks: 10167 [max: 163840] > in-hardirq chains: 21 > in-softirq chains: 353 > in-process chains: 3342 > stack-trace entries: 91035 [max: 262144] > combined max dependencies: 26035284 > hardirq-safe locks: 28 > hardirq-unsafe locks: 460 > softirq-safe locks: 114 > softirq-unsafe locks: 373 > irq-safe locks: 123 > irq-unsafe locks: 460 > hardirq-read-safe locks: 0 > hardirq-read-unsafe locks: 45 > softirq-read-safe locks: 8 > softirq-read-unsafe locks: 39 > irq-read-safe locks: 8 > irq-read-unsafe locks: 45 > uncategorized locks: 106 > unused locks: 1 > max locking depth: 14 > max recursion depth: 10 > debug_locks: 1 > > > I have definitly much higher numbers than those: [root@...htech git]# cat /proc/lockdep_stats lock-classes: 1793 [max: 8191] direct dependencies: 12032 [max: 16384] indirect dependencies: 126642 all direct dependencies: 1310382 dependency chains: 28387 [max: 65536] dependency chain hlocks: 100117 [max: 327680] in-hardirq chains: 3029 in-softirq chains: 7585 in-process chains: 17773 stack-trace entries: 417613 [max: 1048576] combined max dependencies: 523805800 hardirq-safe locks: 1074 hardirq-unsafe locks: 575 softirq-safe locks: 1171 softirq-unsafe locks: 445 irq-safe locks: 1184 irq-unsafe locks: 575 hardirq-read-safe locks: 0 hardirq-read-unsafe locks: 68 softirq-read-safe locks: 17 softirq-read-unsafe locks: 55 irq-read-safe locks: 17 irq-read-unsafe locks: 68 uncategorized locks: 103 unused locks: 0 max locking depth: 16 max recursion depth: 11 debug_locks: 1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists