From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [Bug #38292] slab vs lockdep vs debugobjects Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 00:52:19 +0200 Message-ID: <1309128739.4756.4.camel@twins> References: <1309125708.4756.1.camel@twins> <20110626223134.GA24843@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110626223134.GA24843-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Ingo Molnar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Florian Mickler On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 00:31 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 23:23 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report > > > of recent regressions. > > > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > > from 2.6.39. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team > > > know (either way). > > > > who said its a regression? > > I suspect Rafael saw your mail to lkml with a nasty looking lockdep > message in it and assumed it was a new one? > > Instead it's one that always had the chance to trigger? Yeah, its just terribly hard, you need all the various debug options enabled and a lot of luck. There's nothing involved that changed recently afaik.