Hi Bob, On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 3:07 PM Bob Peterson <rpete...@redhat.com> wrote: > Andreas expressed some concerns about some of the others. For example, he > didn't like that the new "status" sysfs file was taking "try" locks, but > if the lock is held, I don't know of a better way to do this.
walking a linked list that's protected by a spin lock without holding that spin lock is so fundamentally broken that I don't see why we even need to discuss it. There's nothing that guarantees that we'll be able to walk the list. The spin_is_locked checks this patch adds for reporting the states of spin locks are practically useless as well. > He also expressed > a concern that the new file should be in debugfs rather than sysfs. > I'm open to opinions. Regardless of where it is, the new debug file is a > perfect candidate to include in sos reports. It may be better to include more relevant information in trace points. That way, we automatically get that information correlated with other trace events to see what was happening when. Thanks, Andreas
