linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCHv6 00/12] printk: introduce printing kernel thread

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: <20171219010959.GA17164@jagdpanzerIV>
Date:   Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:09:59 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv6 00/12] printk: introduce printing kernel thread

On (12/18/17 15:10), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> > All this is in the current upstream code as well. Steven's patch
> > should make it better in compare with the current upstream code.
> > 
> > Sure, the printk offload approach does all these things better.
> > But there is still the fear that the offload is not reliable
> > in all situations. The lazy offload should handle this well from
> > my POV but I am not 100% sure.
> 
> BTW: There is one interesting thing. If we rely on the kthread
> to handle flood of messages. It might be too slow because it
> reschedules. It might cause loosing messages. Note that
> the kthread should have rather normal priority to avoid
> blocking other processes.

... and this is why preemption is disabled in console_unlock()
in the patch set I have posted.

obviously you haven't even looked at the patches. wonderful.

	-ss