On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:31:16AM +0200, John Kacur wrote: >> > 8752+871+8+95+5+28+543+28+543+15=10888 >> > >> > So you get a stack-trace for each direct-dependency, and you get a >> > stack-trace for each LOCK_state, the sum seems to match the total >> > invocations. >> > >> > Non of these numbers look strange.. >> > >> >> As I told Peter privately the laptop that triggered the >> MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES every time, has met an >> unfortunate early demise. However, I think it was the config - not the >> hardware. On this machine where the above >> numbers come from, I believe I have less debug options configured - >> but it is running the exact same kernel as >> the laptop was. (2.6.33.2-rt13) > > Through a rough computation: > MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES/10888 = 24 > That means the average stack deepth is about 24. > So I'm thinking if we can take a check on the biggest deepth? > Could this make sense? > Hi Yong, yes that makes sense, I'll see if I can provide a patch for that too. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
