On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 10:07:56PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Paul, >> > >> > I found a much better fix than adding the rcu_nocheck(). Simply have the >> > rcu check inside the condition check as well. This way the rcu splat >> > will only happen if the condition is set too. The condition doesn't need >> > the tracepoint enabled. >> > >> > Now I'm thinking that I should push the first patch through my tree as it >> > only touches tracing. The second patch you can freely take. >> > >> > Neither patch really depends on the other, but both patches are required >> > to make the splat go away. If Sedat could test these patches together, >> > and give his tested-by tag, that would be great. I'll run my patch through >> > my full series of tests and then push to linux next. You could take the second >> > patch and push that through your tree (linux-next). When both arrive, the >> > bug will be fixed. The two do not need to come in together. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > -- Steve >> > >> > >> > Steven Rostedt (Red Hat) (2): >> > tracing: Add condition check to RCU lockdep checks >> > x86/tbl/trace: Do not trace on CPU that is offline >> > >> > ---- >> > include/linux/tracepoint.h | 2 +- >> > include/trace/events/tlb.h | 4 +++- >> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> >> Your patchset fixes the issue for me (look at the attached files for >> more detailed information). >> >> I tested the "To Be Loved" (TBL VS. TLB flushes) edition against >> Linux-next (next-20150204) where I had originally seen and reported >> the call-trace. >> >> Before I forget... The Fixes-tag misses pointing to Dave Hansen's... >> >> commit d17d8f9dedb9dd76fd540a5c497101529d9eb25a >> "x86/mm: Add tracepoints for TLB flushes" >> >> My POV is that both patches somehow belong together. >> If you decide to push them through two different trees, please add a >> note/reference to each other. > > I am fine with Steven pushing these, and have dropped his earlier > version from my tree. > OK, so both patches go through Steve's tree. - Sedat - -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
