[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YqVZ4CyWTiDgngkA@google.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 12:13:36 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Peter Geis <pgwipeout@...il.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Threaded printk breaks early debugging
On (22/06/10 17:11), John Ogness wrote:
> It would be trivial to provide a boot parameter for this behavior, but I
> think we first need to see a real problem and also see if we can fix
> that problem.
John, Petr, a quick question
Should a situation when we have only one online CPU be enough of a reason
to do direct printing? Otherwise we might not have CPUs to wakeup khtread on,
e.g. when CPU that printk is in atomic section for too long.
---
@@ -480,6 +480,9 @@ static inline bool allow_direct_printing(void)
if (!printk_kthreads_available)
return true;
+ if (num_online_cpus() == 1)
+ return true;
+
/*
* Prefer direct printing when the system is in a problematic state.
* The context that sets this state will always see the updated value.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists