On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:59:17AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 04:51:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:39:57AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > 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/ . > > > > Yeah, it suffers from the same problem though. Lockdep has static > > resource allocation and never frees them. > > > > The lock classes are the smallest pool and usually run out first, but > > the same could happen for the entries, after all, the more classes we > > have the more class connections can happen. > > > > Anyway, barring a leak and silly class mistakes like mentioned in the > > document there's nothing we can do except raise the number. > > I tried this. When you bump it to 32k, it fares better but then you > start seeing "BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAINS too low!" instead. > I've not tried bumping that yet, as I've stopped seeing these lately > due to hitting more serious bugs first.
What are you doing to trigger all this? I don't see these. Are you loading/unloading modules a lot? -- 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/
