[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200715141622.zd2h3mnhd7ypd2fp@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 16:16:22 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
Cc: paulmck@...nel.org, joel@...lfernandes.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 03/17] rcu/tree: Skip entry into the page
allocator for PREEMPT_RT
On 2020-07-15 15:38:08 [+0200], Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > As of -rc3 it should complain about printk() which is why it is still disabled by default.
> >
> Have you tried to trigger a "complain" you are talking about?
No, but I is wrong because a raw_spinlock_t is acquired followed by a
spinlock_t.
> I suspect to get some trace dump when CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING=y.
You should get one if you haven't received any splat earlier (like from
printk code because it only triggers once).
> Thank you.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists