[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160930010528.GB547@swordfish>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:05:28 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Calvin Owens <calvinowens@...com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] printk: introduce per-cpu alt_print seq buffer
On (09/29/16 14:26), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> > printk()
> > local_irq_save()
> > alt_printk_enter()
>
> We need to make sure that exit() is called on the same CPU.
> Therefore we need to disable preemption as well.
local_irq_save() does this for us, we can't get sched tick or
re-sched IPI, and even more - we eliminate race conditions on
this CPU. only one path can touch alt_printk related stuff,
NMI works with its own buffer.
[..]
> What do you think about my approach with the printk_context per-CPU
> value from the WARN_DEFERRED() patchset? The main idea is that
> the entry()/exit() functions manipulate preempt_count-like per-CPU
> variable. The printk() function selects the safe implementation
> according to the current state.
I'll take a look.
hm, what I was thinking of... you are right, this all smells a bit
bad. I'll revisit it.
thanks!
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists