On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:24:24 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > >> Well, it _is_ mysterious. > >> > >> Did you try to locate the code which failed? I got lost in macros and > >> include files, and gave up very very easily. Stop hiding, Ingo. > >> > >> > > > > OK, I've managed to reproduce it. Removing the local_irq_save/restore > > from sched_clock() makes it go away, as I'd expect (otherwise it would > > really be magic). But given that it never seems to touch the softlockup > > during testing, I have no idea what difference it makes... > > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely > correct, so I think it must be triggering a bug in either the self-tests > or lockdep itself. It's weird. And I don't think the locking selftest code calls sched_clock() (or any other time-related thing) at all, does it? > The only way I could actually extract the test code itself was to run > the whole thing through cpp+indent, but it doesn't shed much light. > > It's also not clear to me if there are 6 independent failures, or if > they're a cascade. Oh well. I'll restore the patches and when people hit problems we can blame Ingo! _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
