[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180124050423.219260c7@vmware.local.home>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 05:04:23 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ftrace, orc, x86, tracing: Fix stack traces again
On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:49:04 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:46:50 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
> > No fundamental objections from me, assuming they are well tested.
> >
>
> Yeah, I ran it through my ftrace test suite, and they did fine till I
> hit test 20 of 34, which tests static ftrace (CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE not
> set), and it crashed. I'm hoping to have it fixed and retested today.
>
Looking at the crash output, it was hung tasks and not an actual crash.
This is the first time I ran this test on 4.15-rc9, I'll make sure it's
not something associated with rc9 before blaming my patches. With
DYNAMIC_FTRACE disabled, the machine runs much slower. With all the PTI
work, it could possibly pushed it passed a breaking point.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists