lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] preempt: Debug for possible missed preemption checks
Hi Steve,

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 18:44:01 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 21:12:14 -0800
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:57:51 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > > When PROVE_LOCKING and PREEMPT is configured, the preempt state
> > > tracking is active. Testing this out, I added a module that did the
> > > following:
> >
> > So I assume your kernel at least has no instances of this bug, so we
> > don't need the patch ;) It *is* a fairly daft thing to do.
> >
> > Maybe stick it in -next for a few months, see if anyone hits it?
>
> Do you have any objections if I add this change to my for-next branch?
> I'll do it as a merge as I do not plan on having it go into the next
> release. But this is an extension to lockdep that when both
> PROVE_LOCKING and PREEMPT are enabled, it can catch a certain bug. But
> as Andrew has stated, it did not find any in the kernel that I'm
> running.
>
> What I propose is to have this go into linux-next, as I assume that
> people test it with PROVE_LOCKING and PREEMPT enabled, and if someone
> adds this bug this patch will catch it (if the bug path is taken).
> Hopefully it would be reported and we know two things. One, someone
> added a bug, and two, this patch is useful to add to mainline.
>
> Here's the catch 22, it may not be worth adding to mainline if it never
> catches any bugs. But we wont know that unless we add it to mainline.
> Maybe adding it to linux-next might be good enough for now.

Given that the merge window will probably open today or tomorrow, I would
prefer any new code not intended for 3.14 not be added to linux-next
until after v3.14-rc1 to avoid unneeded conflicts. If, however, Andrew
thinks it is still worth the (maybe minimal) pain, then fine.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-19 02:21    [W:0.111 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site