On 12/19/2013 10:20 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 09:02:14AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 12/19/2013 05:34 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:53:56AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
Hi all,
I think that my bloated kernel managed to create way too many entries in the
dependency table. If that sounds right, I can send a patch to increase those.
Attached /proc/lock_stat as requested as well.
/proc/lockdep_stats not lock_stat :-)
Do you still happen to have that?
Is the BUG message intentional ("Please attach the output of /proc/lock_stat to the
bug report")?
It does? This happened when I wasn't looking..
Commit 199e371f59d31 did that; and the Changelog fails to mention why or
what. Ingo, Dave?
So the thing I referred to was from Documentation/lockdep-design.txt:
[snip]
That discusses lockdep classes, which is actually fine in my case. I ran out of
MAX_LOCKDEP_ENTRIES, which isn't mentioned anywhere in Documentation/ .
Thanks,
Sasha
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
