![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:26:18 -0000> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > > The debugobjects core code keeps track of operations on static and > > dynamic objects by inserting them into a hashed list and sanity > > checking them on object operations and provides additional checks > > whenever kernel memory is freed. > > Prime candidates for conversion to this interface are locks: spinlocks, > rwlocks, mutexes, etc. > > a) it'd be interesting to get that done, as a proof-of-usefulness thing. /me looks for volunteers :) > b) but this code internally uses spinlocks. Will it explode? It should not, but we can use untracked spinlocks for the internals. > also list_heads and hlists. But> > a) that might be a bit redundant against the custome debugging which lists > already have and Yup. > b) this code uses lists and hlists internally? Yes, it uses hlists. Thanks, tglx -- 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-25 09:25 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||