[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180118054352.GC6529@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:43:52 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
rostedt@...e.goodmis.org, Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] printk: Console owner and waiter logic cleanup
On (01/17/18 12:05), Tejun Heo wrote:
[..]
> > This could very well be a great place to force offloading. If a printk
> > is called from within a printk, at the same context (normal, softirq,
> > irq or NMI), then we should trigger the offloading.
>
> I was thinking more of a timeout based approach (ie. if stuck for
> longer than X or X messages, offload)
yep, that's what I want. for a whole bunch of different reasons.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists