From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965286AbWFATbQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 15:31:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965290AbWFATbQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 15:31:16 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:34987 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965286AbWFATbP (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 15:31:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 21:31:32 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: Arjan van de Ven , michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com, gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.17-rc5-mm2 Message-ID: <20060601193132.GA25877@elte.hu> References: <20060601014806.e86b3cc0.akpm@osdl.org> <6bffcb0e0606010851n75b49d83u9f43136b3108886c@mail.gmail.com> <20060601102234.4f7a9404.akpm@osdl.org> <1149182861.3115.79.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060601104018.b88a3173.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060601104018.b88a3173.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: -3.1 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-3.1 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > > > (lockdep tells us that a mutex was taken at "mutex_lock+0x8/0xa", which is > > > fairly useless. We need to report who the caller of mutex_lock() was). > > > > yeah this has been bugging me as well; either via a wrapper around > > mutex_lock or via the gcc option to backwalk the stack (but that only > > works with frame pointers enabled.. sigh) > > Actually, __builtin_return_address(0) works OK with > -fomit-frame-pointer, and that's all we need here. yes - but that means we'd have to propagate the EIP through all the mutex calls (and the assembly functions, etc.). I tried it and it's really a nightmare. What we can do is to have better information if FRAME_POINTERS is enabled. Ingo