On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 04:16:22PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2020-07-15 15:38:08 [+0200], Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > As of -rc3 it should complain about printk() which is why it is still > > > disabled by default. > > > > > Have you tried to trigger a "complain" you are talking about? > > No, but I is wrong because a raw_spinlock_t is acquired followed by a > spinlock_t. > Right. According to documentation CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING is used to detect raw_spinlock vs. spinlock nesting usage.
> > > I suspect to get some trace dump when CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING=y. > > You should get one if you haven't received any splat earlier (like from > printk code because it only triggers once). > Got it. Thanks! -- Vlad Rezki
