linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: add halt_delay parameter for printk delay in halt phase

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090602142259.GA4580@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 2 Jun 2009 16:22:59 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: add halt_delay parameter for printk delay in
	halt phase


* Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >
> > * Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Add a halt_delay module parameter in printk.c used to read the printk
> >> messages in halt/poweroff/restart phase, delay each printk messages
> >> by halt_delay milliseconds. It is useful for debugging if there's no
> >> other way to dump kernel messages that time.
> >
> > nice idea! We frequently have kernel-death warnings/messages that
> > scroll off too fast and which cannot be captured.
> 
> Thanks! It is for this case indeed.
> 
> >
> >> halt_delay default value is 0, change it by:
> >>
> >> echo xxx > /sys/module/printk/parameters/halt_delay
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/printk.c   |   21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >> lib/Kconfig.debug |   10 ++++++++++
> >> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/printk.c    2009-04-09 16:23:03.000000000 +0800
> >> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/printk.c 2009-06-02 17:45:54.000000000 +0800
> >> @@ -250,6 +250,26 @@ static inline void boot_delay_msec(void)
> >>  }
> >>  #endif
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_HALT_PRINTK_DELAY
> >
> > (this #ifdef is ugly - see below.)
> >
> >> +/* msecs delay after each halt/poweroff/restart phase printk */
> >> +static unsigned int halt_delay;
> >> +
> >> +static inline void halt_delay_msec(void)
> >> +{
> >> +     if (halt_delay == 0 || !(system_state == SYSTEM_HALT
> >> +                             || system_state == SYSTEM_POWER_OFF
> >> +                             || system_state == SYSTEM_RESTART))
> >> +             return;
> >> +
> >> +     mdelay(halt_delay);
> >
> >>
> >>       boot_delay_msec();
> >> +     halt_delay_msec();
> >
> >
> > i think it should be done in boot_delay_msec() and the function
> > should be renamed to print_delay_msec() or so.
> 
> I have two concerns:
> 
> 1. boot_delay use a busy looping with lpj preset because it's too
> early that mdelay is probably not ready yet. Furthermore the delay is
> not accurate. For halt issue we can just use mdelay()
> 
> 2. boot_delay is set by kernel boot paramenter, but IMHO, for halt
> delay use sysfs file is more convenient.
> 
> >
> >>       preempt_disable();
> >>       /* This stops the holder of console_sem just where we want him */
> >> --- linux-2.6.orig/lib/Kconfig.debug  2009-05-12 11:27:22.000000000 +0800
> >> +++ linux-2.6/lib/Kconfig.debug       2009-06-02 17:50:15.000000000 +0800
> >> @@ -647,6 +647,16 @@ config BOOT_PRINTK_DELAY
> >>         BOOT_PRINTK_DELAY also may cause DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP to detect
> >>         what it believes to be lockup conditions.
> >>
> >> +config HALT_PRINTK_DELAY
> >> +     bool "Delay halt/poweroff/restart printk message by N milliseconds"
> >> +     depends on DEBUG_KERNEL && PRINTK && SYSFS
> >> +     default n
> >> +     help
> >> +       This build option allows you to read kernel messages in
> >> +       halt/poweroff/restart phase by inserting a short delay after
> >> +       each one.  The delay is specified in milliseconds on the
> >> +       module parameter: /sys/module/printk/halt_delay.
> >
> > No need for a Kconfig option - this should be an unconditional
> > feature like boot-delay.
> >
> > This will further simplify the patch and will get rid of that ugly
> > #ifdef.
> 
> What do you think removing the Kconfig option, then unconditionally
>  use halt_delay functions?

that's fine too i think. The delay method assymetry between the two 
functions indeed calls for them to be separate.

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