[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170814072900.GL20323@X58A-UD3R>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 16:29:00 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>, kirill@...temov.name,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...radead.org,
npiggin@...il.com, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 06/14] lockdep: Detect and handle hist_lock ring
buffer overwrite
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 03:05:22PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > 1. Boqun's approach
>
> My approach requires(additionally):
>
> MAX_XHLOCKS_NR * sizeof(unsigned int) // because of the hist_id field in hist_lock
>
> bytes per task.
>
> > 2. Peterz's approach
>
> And Peter's approach requires(additionally):
>
> 1 * sizeof(unsigned int)
>
> bytes per task.
>
> So basically we need some tradeoff between memory footprints and history
> precision here.
I see what you intended. Then, Peterz's one looks better.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists