From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Kacur Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: Add nr_save_trace_invocations counter Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:40:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20100423025850.GA21328@windriver.com> <1272009915.1646.25.camel@laptop> <20100423084926.GE21328@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Peter Zijlstra , LKML , linux-rt-users , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , Clark Williams , "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Gregory Haskins To: Yong Zhang Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f225.google.com ([209.85.218.225]:57548 "EHLO mail-bw0-f225.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756805Ab0DWJky (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2010 05:40:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100423084926.GE21328@windriver.com> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Yong Zhang wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:31:16AM +0200, John Kacur wrote: >> > 8752+871+8+95+5+28+543+28+543+15=10888 >> > >> > So you get a stack-trace for each direct-dependency, and you get a >> > stack-trace for each LOCK_state, the sum seems to match the total >> > invocations. >> > >> > Non of these numbers look strange.. >> > >> >> As I told Peter privately the laptop that triggered the >> MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES every time, has met an >> unfortunate early demise. However, I think it was the config - not the >> hardware. On this machine where the above >> numbers come from, I believe I have less debug options configured - >> but it is running the exact same kernel as >> the laptop was. (2.6.33.2-rt13) > > Through a rough computation: > MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES/10888 = 24 > That means the average stack deepth is about 24. > So I'm thinking if we can take a check on the biggest deepth? > Could this make sense? > Hi Yong, yes that makes sense, I'll see if I can provide a patch for that too. Thanks