linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add printk maintainers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20161215123631.1011918a@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:36:31 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add printk maintainers

On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 18:23:36 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> > If all printks are asynchronous, that will be unreliable information.  
> 
> No, that will be _no_ information, since the 'later' part that does the
> flush will never happen.

I meant what would be unreliable, is that the printk that was last
shown will not be the last printk that was called. I'm sure you may get
some printks. But not those that were queued and not printed when the
bug happens. But I think we are just saying the same thing.

> 
> > And really, that information can be extremely useful, but only if it is
> > reliable, otherwise, it becomes useless.  
> 
> Well, if you want reliable get a UART and those 3 patches I did to force
> early_printk :-)
> 

I have my own version too ;-)  But yours is a bit cleaner than mine, so
I may take them instead. I believe the force early_printk is in the -rt
patchset. We just need the locking code in there too.

-- Steve