Robert Richter wrote: > I also tested v2.6.31-rc4 with prove-locking enabled and could not > trigger the warning. My regression runs fine. Please provide more > information (workloads, oprofile setup, cpu info, kernel config) to be > able to reproduce this. > > Thanks, > > -Robert > Hi Robert, I hit the warning on a dual i686 box, with both v2.6.31-rc2 and v2.6.31-rc4. I can actually trigger it by just running opcontrol --start and then opreport. It happens with both --separate=none and --separate=all options (the oprofile deamon using otherwise default options). About the kernel config, prove_locking is on, oprofile is a module and oprofile_ibs is not set. For maor detail, I've attached the config file to the bugzilla. I've tried to reproduce it on 2.6.31-rc5 without success. Regards, Jerome > On 26.07.09 22:28:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report >> of recent regressions. >> >> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions >> from 2.6.30. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know >> (either way). >> >> >> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13809 >> Subject : oprofile: possible circular locking dependency detected >> Submitter : Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Date : 2009-07-22 13:35 (5 days old) >> >> >> -- >> 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/ >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
