Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: use raw spinlocks for trace_vprintk

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 14:32 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 21:26 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > commit 80370cb758e7ca2692cd9fb5e413d970b1f4b2b2
> > > > > Author: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date:   Tue Mar 10 17:16:35 2009 -0400
> > > > > 
> > > > >     tracing: use raw spinlocks for trace_vprintk
> > > > >     
> > > > >     Impact: prevent locking up by lockdep tracer
> > > > >     
> > > > >     The lockdep tracer uses trace_vprintk and thus trace_vprintk can not
> > > > >     call back into lockdep without locking up.
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm, I did this when I posted the lockdep tracepoints, so someone then
> > > > did a bad copy/paste job when renaming ftrace_printk or something?
> > > > 
> > > > See efed792d6738964f399a508ef9e831cd60fa4657
> > > 
> > > What's the conclusion in this thread? I'm holding the pull 
> > > until there's agreement.
> > 
> > I believe the conclusion is that Peter's changes got removed when Frederic 
> > removed the old printk version. But his new version did not have the 
> > changes.
> > 
> > My changes are basically the same as Peter's except that I did not do 
> > anything with the local_irq_save, since I do not think those are needed.
> > 
> > Peter,
> > 
> > Are you fine with the change? I guess it's up to you now.
> 
> Yeah, although I'd rather see the raw_local_irq_save() there too, but
> the patch as it stands solves the problem.

Pulled - thanks guys!

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/