[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130418092031.GH14496@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:20:32 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: sched_clock: Add more notrace to prevent recursion
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:34:45PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 03/26/13 10:35, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 03/21/13 10:49, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >> On 03/14/13 17:08, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>> cyc_to_sched_clock() is called by sched_clock() and cyc_to_ns()
> >>> is called by cyc_to_sched_clock(). I suspect that some compilers
> >>> inline both of these functions into sched_clock() and so we've
> >>> been getting away without having a notrace marking. It seems that
> >>> my compiler isn't inlining cyc_to_sched_clock() though, so I'm
> >>> hitting a recursion bug when I enable the function graph tracer,
> >>> causing my system to crash. Marking these functions notrace fixes
> >>> it. Technically cyc_to_ns() doesn't need the notrace because it's
> >>> already marked inline, but let's just add it so that if we ever
> >>> remove inline from that function it doesn't blow up.
> >> Anyone else seeing this problem?
> > Russell, should I put this into the patch tracker?
>
> I'll throw this into the patch tracker tomorrow if nobody complains.
Or you could do so today.
--
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