On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 21:35:14 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote:
> We're almost there with x86 but my gut feeling tells me that pushing > it now is too risky. I rather prefer quiet holidays for all of us than > the nagging fear that the post holiday inbox will be full of obscure > bug reports and we then start a chase and bandaid race which will kill > the well earned recreation in an instant. > > Though one issue with that is, that for the early boot process > there is no way to store that information as the tracer gets > enabled way after init_IRQ(). But there is no reason why the > tracer could not be enabled before that. All it needs is a > working memory allocator. Steven? > > Now there is another class of problems which might be hard to > debug. When the machine just boots into a hang, so we dont get a > ftrace output neither from an oops nor from a console. It would > be nice if we could have a command line option which prints > enabled trace points via (early_)printk. That would avoid > sending out ad hoc printk debug patches which will basically > provide the same information as the trace_points. That would be > useful for other hard to debug boot hangs as well. Steven? Sure sure, everyone gets a nice calm xmas except for poor Steven who has to hack on early tracepoints such that this will be ready for 3.20! -- Steve (The Grinch who Hacked on Christmas) -- 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/
