On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:26:39AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/5/10 Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>:
> > On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 02:29:31AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> @@ -616,8 +616,17 @@ static bool wake_up_full_nohz_cpu(int cpu)
> >> {
> >> if (tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu)) {
> >> if (cpu != smp_processor_id() ||
> >> - tick_nohz_tick_stopped())
> >> + tick_nohz_tick_stopped()) {
> >> + if (!cpu_online(cpu)) {
> >> + static int printed = 0;
> >> + if (!printed) {
> >> + printk("%d %d\n", cpu,
> >> smp_processor_id());
> >> + dump_stack();
> >> + printed = 1;
> >
> > You know about printk_once, right? We even have all the pr_<level>_once
> > macros.
> >
> > :-)
>
> But but that didn't fit as I also want the dump_stack().
Yeah, true - that would flood otherwise.
/me needs to definitely have coffee before reading mail.
> May be we want dump_stack_once().
>
> In fact it would be nice to have DO_ONCE(something) and stuff whatever
> we want inside. All the printk_once() et. al could even be implemented
> using that.
Frankly, I have needed functionality like that in the past too. Let's
see whose itch needs a scratching earlier :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
