Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:08:33 +0100 | | From | Pavel Machek <> | | Subject | Re: locking hierarchy based on lockdep |
| |
Hi!
> > * Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > I've implemented this as a /proc file, but Ingo suggested that it > > > might be better for us to simply produce an adjaceny list, and then > > > generate a locking hierarchy or anything else of interest off of that > > > list.... [...] > > > > this would certainly be the simplest thing to do - we could extend > > /proc/lockdep with the list of 'immediately after' locks separated by > > commas. (that list already exists: it's the lock_class.locks_after list) > > > > i like your idea of using lockdep to document locking hierarchies. > > > > Ingo > > > > hi, > > So below is patch that does what you suggest, although i had to add the > concept of 'distance' to the patch since the locks_after list loses this > dependency info afaict. i also wrote a user space program to sort the > locks into cluster of interelated locks and then sorted within these > clusters...the results show one large clump of locks...perhaps there are a > few locks that time them all together like scheduler locks...but i > couldn't figure out which ones to exclude to make the list look really > pretty (also, there could be a bug in my program :). Anyways i'm including > my test program and its output too...
Perhaps presenting it as a tree is worth it? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |