[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: bug: ftrace & lockdep badness
2008/11/5 Steven Rostedt <>:
> I do like the fact that lockdep checks it too. But there's times that we
> can not do that.
> Perhaps we can do something in between.
> Make a rb_spin_lock macro inside ring_buffer.c that can be either a
> spin_lock or a raw_spin_lock. There are some tracers that must have this
> as a raw (function trace, irqsoff and preemptoff), but the rest should be
> fine. We can make it where the rb_spin_lock is a raw lock when any of
> those three tracers are configured, and make it into a normal lock when
> they are not.

But this way we won't be able to have lockdep checks when only one of
those "raw-need" tracers are
configured. Wouldn't it better to set it as a function pointer? It
would dynamically reference spin_lock or
raw_spin_lock functions depending on what tracer is currently
selected. I think that wouldn't hardly impact
the performances....

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-05 18:03    [W:0.054 / U:5.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site