On 02/28/2014 02:32 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 01/08/2014 02:21 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: >> Fuzzing a recent kernel with a large configuration hits the static >> allocation limits and disables lockdep. >> >> This patch doubles the limits. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]> >> --- >> kernel/locking/lockdep_internals.h | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep_internals.h >> b/kernel/locking/lockdep_internals.h >> index 4f560cf..51c4b24 100644 >> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep_internals.h >> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep_internals.h >> @@ -54,9 +54,9 @@ enum { >> * table (if it's not there yet), and we check it for lock order >> * conflicts and deadlocks. >> */ >> -#define MAX_LOCKDEP_ENTRIES 16384UL >> +#define MAX_LOCKDEP_ENTRIES 32768UL >> >> -#define MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS 15 >> +#define MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS 16 >> #define MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS (1UL << MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS_BITS) >> >> #define MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS (MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS*5) >> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ enum { >> * Stack-trace: tightly packed array of stack backtrace >> * addresses. Protected by the hash_lock. >> */ >> -#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES 262144UL >> +#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES 524288UL >> >> extern struct list_head all_lock_classes; >> extern struct lock_chain lock_chains[]; >> > > > Can someone pick the patch up please? PeterZ even (seemed to) acked it.
Pretty please? A few people reported that they do what the patch does to get lockdep working right for them, and there were no objections to the patch. Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
