On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 08:09:49AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 10:56 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> > > you're protecting was accessed outside the lock, which is the usual
>> > > source of concurrency problems. In other words lockdep is useful
>> > > but it's not a panacea.
>
>> > Still not an excuse to not have lockdep enabled during tests.
>
>> OK, what makes you think lockdep isn't enabled? Since Kconfig is so
>> complex, I usually use a distro config ... they have it enabled (or at
>> least openSUSE does), so it's enabled for everything I do.
>
> Yeah, I see enough reports with it in embedded contexts to make me think
> people use it there. I know I tend to have it turned on most of the
> time. The concurrency stuff I'm thinking of here is more the things
> you're mentioning with just not taking locks at all when they are needed
> or concurrency with hardware.
I try to have it enabled as much as possible.
However, as it increases kernel size (huge static tables), hitting boot
loader limitations on several boards, I cannot enable all debugging
I would like to on all boards.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
