From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755716Ab0CDEGr (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2010 23:06:47 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f219.google.com ([209.85.220.219]:56005 "EHLO mail-fx0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755464Ab0CDEGo (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2010 23:06:44 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=bFdi72akGGDEdJV9ifu7JSgmauKho6GQr2r7yf0TF5Q4A9VXscAVpO5u6Jf9OQ+HXZ cFy/yrC0LZKzFyHwShKxWsMf09fr7Z5zUFsw8WchxaEgA3VGshb73sRUAVqQ3BoiwTpk HRx1zWtfrvPhVHwd098fWh8NNlgJ6ibxeDwJw= Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 05:06:41 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Steven Rostedt Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Am=E9rico?= Wang , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: 2.6.33: ftrace triggers soft lockup Message-ID: <20100304040640.GB14460@nowhere> References: <2375c9f91003022204p5bdab1fdj3b3500998575fc28@mail.gmail.com> <20100304014641.GH5194@nowhere> <2375c9f91003031901v19c00c21k4a5d46bbe9ade3f@mail.gmail.com> <1267672706.10871.97.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1267672706.10871.97.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 10:18:26PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:01 +0800, Américo Wang wrote: > > > > > > > So it is stuck in stop machine. I wonder where exactly. I see some do_exit > > > at the top but I wonder how much they are reliable. > > > > Well, I think 'kstop' is just random, sometimes I got 'watchdog' or some other > > process. > > > > > > > > Anyway, as Steve said, we really need a full config to reproduce it. > > > > > > > Done in another reply. > > Thanks! > > Frederic, I notice that lockdep is on, did anything change that might > slow down the code in lockdep, or is the function graph tracer doing > more locking? No, there doesn't seem to be intrusive changes in lockdep between .32 and .33 And the function graph tracer is still fully lockless (and hopefully it will be forever).