[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090710203433.GA11105@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:34:33 -0400
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Joao Correia <joaomiguelcorreia@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:33:37PM +0100, Joao Correia wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Joao Correia<joaomiguelcorreia@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 16:25 +0100, Joao Correia wrote:
> >>> (Applies to current Linus tree, as of 2.6.31-rc2)
> >>>
> >>> A third limit becomes apparent as being too low after raising
> >>> MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES and MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, although this one is more
> >>> elusive to trigger.
> >>
> >> Would this involve reloading modules a lot?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > All the other limits were triggered immediatly upon boot. This one
> > happens during regular system usage, after a couple of hours. Not
> > loading more modules than needed, the system stays at around 45
> > modules loaded, give or take. I do have qemu running, if that helps
> > anything.
> >
> > Joao Correia
> >
>
> qemu running as a -host-, not the system running inside it. Just to clear it up.
Could you upload your /proc/lockdep someplace ? Maybe there's some obvious
clues in there like the ones we saw in mine.
Dave
--
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