[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <659206f4-d326-4fd6-3091-085c7eabf280@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 13:54:13 +0800
From: Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org, Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik10@...il.com>,
Amol Grover <frextrite@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, philip.li@...el.com,
lkp@...el.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: Default enable RCU list lockdep debugging with PROVE_RCU
On 5/18/20 5:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:36:26PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>>
>>> On May 14, 2020, at 2:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Fair enough! And yes, the Linux kernel is quite large, so I certainly am
>>> not asking you to test the whole thing yourself.
>> Ok, I saw 0day bot also started to report those which is good. For example,
>>
>> lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/12/1358
>>
>> which so far is nit blocking 0day on linux-next since it does not use panic_on_warn yet (while syzbot does).
>>
>> Thus, I am more convinced that we should not revert the commit just for syzbot until someone could also convince 0day to select RCU_EXPERT and then DEBUG_RCU_LIST?
> Let's ask the 0day people, now CCed, if they would be willing to
> build with CONFIG_RCU_EXPERT=y and CONFIG_DEBUG_RCU_LIST=y on some
> fraction of their testing. ;-)
>
> Thanx, Paul
Hi,
Thanks for your advice, we'll support it in the near future.
Best Regards,
Rong Chen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists