[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100113163751.GA13300@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:37:51 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
dvhltc@...ibm.com, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
dhowells@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/8] rcu: add lockdep-based diagnostics to
rcu_dereference()
* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:22:42AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > FYI, i'm getting various runtime warnings triggered by the new RCU checks:
> >
> > [ 20.630034] WARNING: at net/core/sock.c:1076 __sk_free+0x108/0x140()
> >
> > bootlog and config attached.
>
> Gah!!! I forgot to label the RCU-lockdep stuff "RFC"!!! Could you
> please rewind tip/core/rcu back to b6407e8639 ("rcu: Give different
> levels of the rcu_node hierarchy distinct lockdep names")?
Sure - i have done that.
> I have fixes for many of the warnings below, both as modifications to uses
> of RCU and as modifications to the check code itself. But I have been
> building a new patchsets rather than keeping patches on top of this
> patchset. I also have modifications in the works to ease transition, for
> example, but having a separate CONFIG_PROVE_RCU.
Sure, no problem!
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