linux-kernel - Re: Reading EeePC900 battery info causes stalls (was Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <48D50498.5050608@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:11:36 +0100
From:	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
	astarikovskiy@...e.de
Subject: Re: Reading EeePC900 battery info causes stalls (was Re: How how
   latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?)

Steven Rostedt wrote:
> The wake up tracing is CONFIG_SCHED_TRACER. If you do not see 
> "wakeup" as one of the available tracers in available_tracers, then check
> your dmesg and see if you have CONFIG_FTRACE_STARTUP_TEST enabled. There 
> was a known bug that would cause the wakeup tracing to fail the test. When 
> a trace fails the startup test, it is disabled.

This is exactly the case (dmesg reports the ftrace wakeup startup test 
failed). That's what I get for not reading my dmesg more carefully...

-- 
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
--
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/