On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 11:26:35 +0200
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Hmm, good question. I could possibly make all the tracepoint code into
> > its own section. And then look to see if any spin locks exist in them.
> > That wouldn't be too trivial to implement though.
>
> pick a bit from the
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 11:26:35 +0200
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Hmm, good question. I could possibly make all the tracepoint code into
> > its own section. And then look to see if any spin locks exist in them.
> > That wouldn't be too trivial to implement though.
>
> pick a bit from the
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 04:30:10PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:22:15 +0200
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > > > trace event
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 04:30:10PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:22:15 +0200
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > > > trace event
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:22:15 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > > trace event invokes cgroup_path() which acquires a spin_lock_t and this
> > > is invoked
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:22:15 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > > trace event invokes cgroup_path() which acquires a spin_lock_t and this
> > > is invoked
On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > trace event invokes cgroup_path() which acquires a spin_lock_t and this
> > is invoked within a preempt_disable()ed section.
>
> Correct. And I wish no trace event
On 2018-07-09 15:01:54 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > which is the trace_cgroup_rmdir() trace event in cgroup_rmdir(). The
> > trace event invokes cgroup_path() which acquires a spin_lock_t and this
> > is invoked within a preempt_disable()ed section.
>
> Correct. And I wish no trace event
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:38:05 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Clark showed me this:
>
> | BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
> kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:974
> | in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1, name: systemd
> | 5 locks held by systemd/1:
> | #0:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:38:05 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Clark showed me this:
>
> | BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
> kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:974
> | in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1, name: systemd
> | 5 locks held by systemd/1:
> | #0:
Clark showed me this:
| BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:974
| in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1, name: systemd
| 5 locks held by systemd/1:
| #0: (sb_writers#7){.+.+}, at: [<(ptrval)>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x50
| #1:
Clark showed me this:
| BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:974
| in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 1, name: systemd
| 5 locks held by systemd/1:
| #0: (sb_writers#7){.+.+}, at: [<(ptrval)>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x50
| #1:
12 matches
Mail list logo