From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752767AbZCKTpl (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:45:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750921AbZCKTpc (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:45:32 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:49186 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750807AbZCKTpc (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:45:32 -0400 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: use raw spinlocks for trace_vprintk From: Peter Zijlstra To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Ingo Molnar , LKML , Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: References: <1236754764.22914.3680.camel@twins> <20090311182656.GA23739@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:45:11 +0100 Message-Id: <1236800711.8192.707.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.25.92 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 14:32 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 21:26 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > > commit 80370cb758e7ca2692cd9fb5e413d970b1f4b2b2 > > > > Author: Steven Rostedt > > > > Date: Tue Mar 10 17:16:35 2009 -0400 > > > > > > > > tracing: use raw spinlocks for trace_vprintk > > > > > > > > Impact: prevent locking up by lockdep tracer > > > > > > > > The lockdep tracer uses trace_vprintk and thus trace_vprintk can not > > > > call back into lockdep without locking up. > > > > > > Hmm, I did this when I posted the lockdep tracepoints, so someone then > > > did a bad copy/paste job when renaming ftrace_printk or something? > > > > > > See efed792d6738964f399a508ef9e831cd60fa4657 > > > > What's the conclusion in this thread? I'm holding the pull > > until there's agreement. > > I believe the conclusion is that Peter's changes got removed when Frederic > removed the old printk version. But his new version did not have the > changes. > > My changes are basically the same as Peter's except that I did not do > anything with the local_irq_save, since I do not think those are needed. > > Peter, > > Are you fine with the change? I guess it's up to you now. Yeah, although I'd rather see the raw_local_irq_save() there too, but the patch as it stands solves the problem.