[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1415380610.23530.12.camel@perches.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:16:50 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, patches@...aro.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3.18-rc3] kdb: Avoid printing KERN_ levels to consoles
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 16:50 +0000, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 07/11/14 16:04, Joe Perches wrote:
> > why insert KERN_INFO?
>
> vkdb_printf() and printk() can appear either way round in a stack
> trace. Each is capable of calling the other and a flag (kdb_trap_printk)
> is used to prevent mutual recursion.
I see.
> A complete solution would require a means to know whether vkdb_printf()
> were entered directly or from printk(). A flag passed to vkdb_printf()
> would achieve this. I'll take a look.
That bit seems pretty simple and sensible.
I don't know this code at all but would it be better if
the kdb_trap_printk accesses were converted to atomic_<foo>?
Might this bit in vkdb_printf:
saved_trap_printk = kdb_trap_printk;
kdb_trap_printk = 0;
be better atomic_xchg?
and the kdb_trap_printk++ bits as atomic_inc, etc...
--
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