[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1280751784.1923.146.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:23:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, h.mitake@...il.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] perf lock: Add new event "lock_acquired_waittime"
for contention analysis
On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 14:36 +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
> I want to make lockdep production kernel feature with dynamic
> patching.
Not really feasible. Note that enabling lockdep grows the size of
spinlock_t (and others) quite significantly.
Then there is the problem that you need to pass all tasks through some
quiesent state in order to enable lockdep (there must be a guarantee of
no locks held).
Now, we could possibly make it all work, but I'm not at all convinced we
want to pay the price, which is a much _much_ more complex
infrastructure.
--
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