Re: linux-next: Tree for June 23

["Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> I have created today's linux-next tree at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git
> (patches at
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/sfr/linux-next/).  If you
> are tracking the linux-next tree using git, you should not use "git pull"
> to do so as that will try to merge the new linux-next release with the
> old one.  You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki
> (see below).

Hi,

I got this:

Testing tracer sched_switch: PASSED
Testing tracer sysprof: PASSED
Testing tracer ftrace: PASSED
Testing dynamic ftrace: PASSED
Testing tracer irqsoff: PASSED
Testing tracer preemptoff: PASSED
Testing tracer preemptirqsoff: <4>------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2680 check_flags+0x142/0x160()
Pid: 2, comm: kthreadd Not tainted 2.6.26-rc6-next-20080620 #34
 [<c01388a4>] warn_on_slowpath+0x54/0x70
 [<c015a9d5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
 [<c015aa7b>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0x10
 [<c0109e85>] ? native_sched_clock+0xb5/0x110
 [<c05bdb28>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x48/0x80
 [<c02b5748>] ? debug_locks_off+0x8/0x50
 [<c017dcbe>] ? ftrace_record_ip+0x12e/0x240
 [<c010455c>] ? mcount_call+0x5/0x9
 [<c0159f22>] check_flags+0x142/0x160
 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160
 [<c015e089>] lock_acquire+0x59/0xd0
 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160
 [<c05bd2ad>] _spin_lock+0x3d/0x70
 [<c014d3c0>] ? kthreadd+0xf0/0x160
 [<c014d3c0>] kthreadd+0xf0/0x160
 [<c014d2d0>] ? kthreadd+0x0/0x160
 [<c0104547>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
 =======================
---[ end trace a7919e7f17c0a725 ]---
possible reason: unannotated irqs-on.
irq event stamp: 3198
hardirqs last  enabled at (3197): [<c015cb2b>] trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0x10
hardirqs last disabled at (3198): [<c015aa7b>] trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0x10
softirqs last  enabled at (0): [<c01370ad>] copy_process+0x43d/0x1120
softirqs last disabled at (0): [<00000000>] 0x0
PASSED
Testing tracer wakeup: PASSED


Also, shouldn't there be a MAINTAINERS entry or some file in
Documentation/ for ftrace?


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036