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  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]
Date:   Mon, 4 Mar 2019 20:07:03 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <>
To:     John Ogness <>
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Petr Mladek <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>,
        Daniel Wang <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Linus Torvalds <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Alan Cox <>,
        Jiri Slaby <>,
        Peter Feiner <>,,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 08/25] printk: add ring buffer and kthread

On (03/04/19 19:00), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> But in general, channels which depend on preemptible printk will become
> totally useless in some cases.

Which brings me to a question - what are those messages/channels?
Not important enough to be printed on consoles immediately, yet important
enough to pass the suppress_message_printing() check. We may wave those
semi-important messages good bye, I'm afraid, preemptible printk will
take care of it.

So... do we have a case here? Do we really need printk-kthread?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists