[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221102115947.000897fa@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:59:47 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Leonid Ravich <leonid.ravich@...anetworks.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yigal Korman <yigal.korman@...anetworks.com>,
"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Leon Ravich <lravich@...il.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: ib_mad ftrace event unsupported migration
On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:24:20 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
> No, it doesn't muck with preemption, it will have some sleeping lock,
> eg mlx5_ib_query_pkey() does a memory allocation as the first thing
>
> It seems like a bug that calling kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL)/might_sleep()
> from within a tracepoint doesn't trigger a warning?
Has nothing to do with tracepoints. You could call it a bug that it
doesn't trigger a warning when preemption is disabled. But then again,
it would if you enabled DEBUG_PREEMPT and possibly LOCKDEP too. So, I chalk
this up to a lack of proper testing.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists