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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:01:01 +0200 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: git rid of [sched_delayed] message for printk_deferred On Sat 20-09-14 17:47:33, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 07:12:24AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Thu 18-09-14 19:34:14, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 08:31:35PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > I totally didn't get what you wrote. > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > We don't want to know if it got delayed, then the patch to remove that > > > > print seems correct. > > > > > > Why would you not want to know that? Also was that the actual argument? > > > Lemme go check the earlier emails -- I cannot find that argument in the > > > first few emails. > > Well, so what gets delayed is printing from kernel buffer to console. > > So this is the same as when you do printk() when console lock is taken by > > someone else. So it seems a bit strange to prepend [delayed] in some cases > > and not in others. > > The difference is that when someone else has the console lock, he > guarantees it gets out. Whereas with the delayed thing it can take a > virtual forever to get out. > > > Another question is what the [delayed] prefix would be useful for? If the > > message eventually gets printed to console I don't see why you would care > > it was printed few ms after it entered the kernel buffer (after all the > > time stamp before the line will be the time when it entered the kernel > > buffer). And if the kernel crashes in such a way that the message doesn't > > get printed, then bad luck but prefix in the kernel log buffer isn't going > > to make that any better :) > > > > This all feels like bikeshedding, I don't deeply care what gets done but I > > wanted to point out I don't really see a use for [delayed]... > > Sure, I was just pointing out that those arguments had not been made. I > think you're right, if you see the msg it obviously made it out. If you > don't see it, you don't know either way. > > But a patch removing it _must_ make those arguments, it did not. Markus, could you please resend the patch with Steven's ack and expanded changelog? Thanks! Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists