Re: a different perf tracepoint bug

[Vince Weaver]

On Wed, 6 Nov 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> > [11559.476002]  <<EOE>>  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff8104acaa>] ? __send_signal+0xd8/0x26f
> 
> Can you find the exact location of __send_signal()?

I'm not sure what you mean, but:

addr2line -e ./vmlinux ffffffff8104acaa
linux-kernel/linux-3.12/kernel/signal.c:1095

which is

        q = __sigqueue_alloc(sig, t, GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NOTRACK_FALSE_POSITIVE,
                override_rlimit);
-->     if (q) {
                list_add_tail(&q->list, &pending->list);
                switch ((unsigned long) info) {
                case (unsigned long) SEND_SIG_NOINFO:
...


though this might just be a case where tracepoints are happening too 
quickly and the kernel gets stuck and can't keep up.  Previously I was
using a hacked kernel that made the watchdog continually print rather than 
just warn once, the better to see if any progress was being made.

Vince
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/