[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081216215941.GA14787@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:59:41 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/ftrace: use preempt_enable_no_resched_notrace
in ring_buffer_time_stamp()
* Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> 2008/12/16 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Dec 2008, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote:
> >>
> >> The hard reboots I've seen are related to x86-64 while
> >> disabling/reenabling a CPU through /sys/device/system/cpu
> >> No tracer was enabled at these times (the problem still remains with
> >> latest updates on -tip for half an hour).
> >
> > Do you have STACK_TRACER enabled?
> >
> > -- Steve
> >
>
> You were right. I've just built a kernel without STACK_TRACER and the
> problem disappears...
i noticed high stack-tracer overhead too. Which is understandable i guess:
the stack tracer keeps the mcount callbacks running all the time and can
save the stack backtrace of the highest-stack-usage point in time that the
kernel ever has hit in the past. That is a pretty powerful debug
capability, with appropriate costs.
Ingo
--
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