Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:23:52 +0200 | From | "Vegard Nossum" <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: Tree for June 23 |
| |
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > I have created today's linux-next tree at > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git > (patches at > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/sfr/linux-next/). If you > are tracking the linux-next tree using git, you should not use "git pull" > to do so as that will try to merge the new linux-next release with the > old one. You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki > (see below).
Hi,
I got this:
Testing tracer sched_switch: PASSED Testing tracer sysprof: PASSED Testing tracer ftrace: PASSED Testing dynamic ftrace: PASSED Testing tracer irqsoff: PASSED Testing tracer preemptoff: PASSED Testing tracer preemptirqsoff: <4>------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2680 check_flags+0x142/0x160() Pid: 2, comm: kthreadd Not tainted 2.6.26-rc6-next-20080620 #34 [<c01388a4>] warn_on_slowpath+0x54/0x70 [<c015a9d5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0 [<c015aa7b>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0x10 [<c0109e85>] ? native_sched_clock+0xb5/0x110 [<c05bdb28>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x48/0x80 [<c02b5748>] ? debug_locks_off+0x8/0x50 [<c017dcbe>] ? ftrace_record_ip+0x12e/0x240 [<c010455c>] ? mcount_call+0x5/0x9 [<c0159f22>] check_flags+0x142/0x160 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160 [<c015e089>] lock_acquire+0x59/0xd0 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160 [<c05bd2ad>] _spin_lock+0x3d/0x70 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160 [<c014d3c0>] kthreadd+0xf0/0x160 [<c014d2d0>] ? kthreadd+0x0/0x160 [<c0104547>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 ======================= ---[ end trace a7919e7f17c0a725 ]--- possible reason: unannotated irqs-on. irq event stamp: 3198 hardirqs last enabled at (3197): [<c015cb2b>] trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0x10 hardirqs last disabled at (3198): [<c015aa7b>] trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0x10 softirqs last enabled at (0): [<c01370ad>] copy_process+0x43d/0x1120 softirqs last disabled at (0): [<00000000>] 0x0 PASSED Testing tracer wakeup: PASSED
Also, shouldn't there be a MAINTAINERS entry or some file in Documentation/ for ftrace?
Vegard
-- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
| |