[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YQlNtr7TNAWtB8XF@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 17:07:50 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@...esoftware.com>,
Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>, Andrij Abyzov <aabyzov@....com>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>,
Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
Zhang Qilong <zhangqilong3@...wei.com>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v1 10/10] serial: 8250: implement write_atomic
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:19:01PM +0206, John Ogness wrote:
> Implement an NMI-safe write_atomic() console function in order to
> support synchronous console printing.
>
> Since interrupts need to be disabled during transmit, all usage of
> the IER register is wrapped with access functions that use the
> printk cpulock to synchronize register access while tracking the
> state of the interrupts. This is necessary because write_atomic()
> can be called from an NMI context that has preempted write_atomic().
...
> +static inline void serial8250_set_IER(struct uart_8250_port *up,
> + unsigned char ier)
> +{
> + struct uart_port *port = &up->port;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + bool is_console;
> + is_console = uart_console(port);
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> +
> + serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
I would rewrite it as
if (uart_console()) {
console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
} else {
serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
}
No additional variable, easier to get the algorithm on the first glance, less
error prone.
> +}
> +static inline unsigned char serial8250_clear_IER(struct uart_8250_port *up)
> +{
> + struct uart_port *port = &up->port;
> + unsigned int clearval = 0;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + unsigned int prior;
> + bool is_console;
> +
> + is_console = uart_console(port);
> +
> + if (up->capabilities & UART_CAP_UUE)
> + clearval = UART_IER_UUE;
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> +
> + prior = serial_port_in(port, UART_IER);
> + serial_port_out(port, UART_IER, clearval);
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
Ditto.
> + return prior;
> +}
...
> + is_console = uart_console(port);
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> up->ier = port->serial_in(port, UART_IER);
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
> +
I'm wondering why you can't call above function here?
...
> + is_console = uart_console(p);
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> ier = p->serial_in(p, UART_IER);
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
Ditto.
...
> + is_console = uart_console(port);
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> +
> + ier = serial_in(up, UART_IER);
> + serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier & (~mask));
> +
> + if (is_console)
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
Ditto.
...
> + if (uart_console(port))
> + console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
> +
> + ier = serial_in(up, UART_IER);
> + serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier | mask);
> +
> + if (uart_console(port))
> + console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
Ditto.
Looking into above note, that uart_console(port) can give different results
here, AFAIR.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists