lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Oops/Warning report for the week of September 10th, 2008
Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 12:16:48PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> Rank 2: sysfs_add_one (warning)
>> Reported 215 times (3751 total reports)
>> Duplicate sysfs registration; mostly in USB audio
>> This warning was last seen in version 2.6.27-rc5, and first seen in
>> 2.6.24-rc6.
>> More info: http://www.kerneloops.org/searchweek.php?search=sysfs_add_one
>
> This one is going to be a bit tough to track over time as it is the low
> level sysfs code complaining that a user of it is doing something wrong.
> So you can get all sorts of different callers causing the same warning,
> we just have to look at the backtrace to get a hint of who is causing
> the problem.
>
> Is there any way to break this one down further by caller so we can try
> to narrow it down? I thought you did that for other types of warnings
> in the past (may_sleep(), etc.)
>

it's.. a harder one than that.
All the cases so far were "if it's <this function> for <this class>, go one
down in the stacktrace", which I've done table driven.

For sysfs_add_one() it seems to be "if it is sysfs_add_one, dive into the
stacktrace to pick the one below device_add except if that is device_register
or device_create, because then you pick the one below that instead"

Not impossible, just going to take me more than the 3 minutes it normally takes ;-)

(but please correct me if my description of the heuristic is wrong)


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-11 15:27    [W:0.082 / U:1.392 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site