lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] Increase lockdep limits: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES
From
Date
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 12:10 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 10:02:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 00:39 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:36:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > Looking at a lockdep dump hch gave me I can see that that is certainly
> > > > possible, I see tons of very deep callchains.
> > > >
> > > > /me wonders if we're getting significantly deeper..
> > >
> > > Looking at /proc/lockdep, I'm curious..
> > > Take a look at http://davej.fedorapeople.org/lockdep
> > > scroll down to c12c0924
> > >
> > > What's up with all those old_style_spin_init's ?
> >
> > What kernel are you running?
>
> ..31rc2
>
> > Does your lib/dma_debug.c:dma_debug_init()
> > have spin_lock_init() in that HASH_SIZE loop?
>
> it's doing it by hand..
>
> 717 for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE; ++i) {
> 718 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dma_entry_hash[i].list);
> 719 dma_entry_hash[i].lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> 720 }

Hmm, that's the problem, it should read:

for (i = 0; i < HASH_SIZE; ++i) {
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dma_entry_hash[i].list);
spin_lock_init(&dma_entry_hash[i].lock);
}

and does in -tip, so maybe Ingo took that patch, but I thought Joerg
would push that Linus wards. Joerg?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-09 19:11    [W:0.100 / U:0.864 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site