On Mon, 8 Dec 2014 13:40:35 -0500 Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hello, Andrew.
>
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:06:13AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > sysrq-t already produces thousands of lines of output. Maybe create a
> > new keycode for this?
>
> Believe it or not, we already used up all alphanumerics if we count in
> the arch-specific ones. Given that the workqueue information would
> primarily be useful in tracking down hangs and we'd want to see the
> dump of tasks in that case anyway, sysrq-t isn't a bad fit for
> appending workqueue dump. If anybody has a better idea, I'm all ears.
Really. Upper case?
> ...
> > > +static void pr_cont_pool_info(struct worker_pool *pool)
> > > +{
> > > + if (pool->cpu >= 0)
> > > + pr_cont(" cpu=%d", pool->cpu);
> > > + else if (pool->node != NUMA_NO_NODE)
> > > + pr_cont(" node=%d", pool->node);
> > > +
> > > + if (pool->cpu < 0) {
> > > + static char cpus_buf[PAGE_SIZE];
> >
> > Ouch. This could be [NR_CPUS + epsilon]?
>
> It's bitmap mask printing so each char can show four cpus. PAGE_SIZE
> should be enough for now but I think we need cpumask_prcont().
I'm not concerned about it being too small ;) Not many people have 16k
CPUs - can it be shrunk? It's particularly gross when CONFIG_SMP=n!
--
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/
