[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1239904428.23397.3278.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:53:48 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/events/lockdep: move tracepoints within
recursive protection
On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 13:45 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 12:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > plain text document attachment
> > > (0002-tracing-events-lockdep-move-tracepoints-within-recu.patch)
> > > From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
> > >
> > > With the current location of the tracepoints in lockdep, the system
> > > can hard lockup in minutes when the tracepoints are enabled.
> > >
> > > Moving the tracepoints outside inside the lockdep protection solves
> > > the issue.
> >
> > NAK
>
> Can we at least add this as a workaround. Basically, the lockdep
> tracepoints are broken as is. I do not plan on changing the logic of the
> events to prevent nesting. That's a feature I use. If we don't allow
> nesting, we must drop events, which is bad.
No, I would say any nesting is a bug, and should stop tracing and print
a splat. No need to drop events.
> The other answer is simply to remove the trace points in lockdep, until
> they work again.
Well, they worked when I added them, so someone broke it.
--
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