[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878s7d1nkn.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 16:40:24 +0100
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: synchronization model: was: Re: [PATCH printk-rework 09/14] printk: introduce a kmsg_dump iterator
On 2021-02-24, John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de> wrote:
> The @active flag is useless. It should be removed.
I would like to clarify my statement, because the @active flag _did_
protect the arch/um dumper until now. (Although it didn't actually
matter because arch/um does not have SMP or preemption support.)
In mainline we have 6 dumpers. They can be classified as follows:
1. Dumpers that provide their own synchronization to protect against
parallel or nested dump() calls.
- arch/powerpc/kernel/nvram_64.c
- fs/pstore/platform.c
- arch/um/kernel/kmsg_dump.c (after this series)
2. Dumpers that are safe because they only dump on KMSG_DUMP_PANIC,
which (currently) can never happen in parallel or nested.
- arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-kmsg.c
- drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c
3. Dumpers that are unsafe and even @active did not provide the needed
synchronization.
- drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c
In all 6 dumpers, @action does not provide any help. That is why it can
be removed.
But I am concerned about drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c that does not have any
synchronization. Since my series is adding sychronization to
arch/um/kernel/kmsg_dump.c, I suppose it should also add it to
drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c also.
And rather than moving the useless @active from kmsg_dumper to
kmsg_dump_iter, I should just drop it.
Unless there are any objections, I will make these changes for my v3.
John Ogness
Powered by blists - more mailing lists