[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170908160039.24ab418c@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:00:39 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mhiramat@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
vedang.patel@...el.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
joel.opensrc@...il.com, joelaf@...gle.com,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, baohong.liu@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 35/40] tracing: Reverse the order
event_mutex/trace_types_lock are taken
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:41:36 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:31:35 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:57:47 -0500
> > Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Change the order event_mutex and trace_types_lock are taken, to avoid
> > > circular dependencies and lockdep spew.
> > >
> > > Changing the order shouldn't matter to any current code, but does to
> > > anything that takes the event_mutex first and then trace_types_lock.
> > > This is the case when calling tracing_set_clock from inside an event
> > > command, which already holds the event_mutex.
> >
> > This is a very scary patch. I'll apply it and run a bunch of tests with
> > lockdep enabled. Let's see what blows up (or not).
>
> Boom!
>
> It appears to be caused by instance creation. I'll look at that.
OK, this may be a simple fix. I'll send you a patch to fold in after I
finish testing it.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists