From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmemcheck: Disable SLUB and SLAB debugging when kmemcheck is enabled
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:17:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0902251117h7a4a6e9ao34e972110d8b40a1@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1235410406.6216.69.camel@penberg-laptop>
2009/2/23 Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>:
> On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 10:41 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>>
>> > Enabling kmemcheck in Kconfig is a painful experience. Lets make it a
>> > tad bit easier by inverting the dependencies to SLUB and SLAB debugging.
>> > As kmemcheck is more powerful than slab debugging, disable the latter
>> > functionality if an user enables kmemcheck.
>>
>> SLUB_DEBUG is fundamentally different from SLAB_DEBUG. It only includes
>> the code to be able to enable debugging at runtime. It does not enable
>> debugging.
>
> Yes, I know that but we can't really let the user enable both, slub
> debugging and kmemcheck debugging, at run-time. That's why I used
> SLUB_DEBUG here.
It is possible. Which is why it said SLUB_DEBUG_ON to begin with. This
is how it works:
If slub_debug=,xyz is specified on the command line, the SLUB
debugging will be used for the "xyz" cache, and kmemcheck will track
the rest (all non-slub-debugged caches). So if we only disable
SLUB_DEBUG_ON, then slub debugging and kmemcheck debugging can still
be mixed at boot-time, but kmemcheck will take precedence unless
slub_debug= is specified.
Can you rethink whether SLUB_DEBUG or SLUB_DEBUG_ON is the one we
really want to depend on !KMEMCHECK, and either submit a new patch or
convince me that this is sufficient?
Thanks!
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-25 19:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-23 9:35 Pekka Enberg
2009-02-23 15:25 ` Sitsofe Wheeler
2009-02-23 15:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-02-23 17:33 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-02-25 19:17 ` Vegard Nossum [this message]
2009-02-25 21:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-02-26 7:17 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-02-26 8:16 ` Vegard Nossum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=19f34abd0902251117h7a4a6e9ao34e972110d8b40a1@mail.gmail.com \
--to=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®