[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87o7bt6qpf.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:20:04 +0106
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>, DRI Development
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Daniel Vetter
<daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>, Jocelyn
Falempe <jfalempe@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>, Lukas Wunner
<lukas@...ner.de>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Steven Rostedt
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard
<mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David
Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [RFC] drm/panic: Add drm panic locking
Hi Daniel,
Great to see this moving forward!
On 2024-03-01, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> wrote:
> But for the initial cut of a drm panic printing support I don't think
> we need that, because the critical sections are extremely small and
> only happen once per display refresh. So generally just 60 tiny locked
> sections per second, which is nothing compared to a serial console
> running a 115kbaud doing really slow mmio writes for each byte. So for
> now the raw spintrylock in drm panic notifier callback should be good
> enough.
Is there a reason you do not use the irqsave/irqrestore variants? By
leaving interrupts enabled, there is the risk that a panic from any
interrupt handler may block the drm panic handler.
John Ogness
Powered by blists - more mailing lists