On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 02:55:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 19:28:30 +0100 > Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 02:10:20PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:05:06 -0700 > > > Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote: > > > > > > > In the long run, I think the right solution is to rewrite even more of > > > > this mess in C. We really ought to be able to put the IRQ flag > > > > tracing and the context tracking into C code. > > > > > > And once we do that, we can work on getting the irq tracing > > > incorporated into a jump_label type that we could possibly enable > > > lockdep at start up, and then disable it later, even on production > > > systems! That is, to be able to turn it off and bring the system back > > > up to full speed. > > > > You forget the stupid amount of data bloat that lockdep brings. > > No I didn't. Some users only care about performance, but find memory > cheap.
Because cache-misses are free?
