On 12/03/2014 12:58 AM, Dâniel Fraga wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 16:40:37 +0800 > Lai Jiangshan <la...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > >> It is needed at lest for testing. >> >> CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=y with CONFIG_PREEMPT=n is needed for testing too. >> >> Please enable them (or enable them under CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y) > > Lai, sorry but I didn't understand. Do you mean both of them > enabled? Because how can CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU be enabled without > CONFIG_PREEMPT ?
Sorry, I replied to Paul, and my reply was off-topic, it has nothing related your reports. Sorry again. I think we need two combinations for testing (not mainline, but I think they (combinations) should be enabled for test farms). So I hope Paul enable them (combinations). combination1: CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=n & CONFIG_PREEMPT=y combination2: CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=y & CONFIG_PREEMPT=n The core code should work correctly in these combinations. I agree with Paul that these combinations should not be enabled in production, So my request is: enable these combinations under CONFIG_RCU_TRACE or CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE. For myself, I always edit the Kconfig directly, thus it is not a problem for me. But there is no way for test farms to test these combinations. Thanks, Lai > > If you mean both enabled, I already reported a call trace with > both enabled: > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85941 > > Please see my previous answer to Linus and Paul too. > > Regarding CONFIG_RCU_TRACE, do you mean > "CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE"? I couldn't find CONFIG_RCU_TRACE. > > Thanks. > -- 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/
