lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH tip/core/urgent] fix several lockdep splats, allow multiple splats
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:16:45PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:33:34 EDT, Mathieu Desnoyers said:
>
> > I recommend creating a kernel command line parameter that would tweak
> > the number of messages printed by lockdep. The default would indeed by 1
> > message, but people in a debugging marathon can specify a larger value
> > so they won't have to reboot between each individual lockdep error.
>
> Yeah, that would rock for development kernels - playing whack-a-mole with
> a half-dozen new lockdep whinges can easily stretch out for quite some time.

The RCU-lockdep splats are a bit different in nature than the
deadlock-related splats that lockdep normally prints. The RCU-lockdep
splats are transient in nature, and it is easy to apply WARN_ON_ONCE().
In contrast, if you permit multiple deadlock-related lockdep splats,
you tend to get lots of warnings about the same deadlock cycle.

So how about an additional kernel configuration variable, default
disabled, perhaps named CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_MULTIPLE, that allows a
single boot to see multiple messages? Unlike the dyntick-idle
WARN_ON()s that generated multi-gigabyte console logs in a great
hurry, I haven't yet seen excessive quantities of RCU-lockdep splats,
so I don't see the need for an integer limit.

Thoughts?

Thanx, Paul


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-30 20:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site