linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] printk: Defer printing to irq work when we printed too much

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: <20131107183717.0fc9eb6e@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:37:17 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] printk: Defer printing to irq work when we printed
 too much

On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 00:21:51 +0100
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
 
> Ok I see now.
> 
> But then this irq_work based solution won't work if, say, you run in full dynticks
> mode. Also the hook on the timer interrupt is something that I wish we get rid
> of on archs that can trigger self-IPIs.

Do we really want that? What about users that use LAZY? That is, the
work isn't that important to trigger right now (added interrupt
expense).

> 
> Notwithstanding it's going to have scalibility issues as irq work then converges
> to a single list for unbound works.

Well, it doesn't seem to be something that would be called often. All
CPUs checking a variable that is seldom changed should not have any
scalability issues. Unless of course it happens to share a cache line
with a variable that does change often.

> 
> Offloading to a workqueue would be perhaps better, and writing to the serial
> console could then be done with interrupts enabled, preemptible context, etc...

Oh God no ;-)  Adding workqueue logic into printk just spells a
nightmare of much more complexity for a critical kernel infrastructure.

-- Steve
--
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/