[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZzM0T5b4uKIN0PM7@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 11:56:15 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Conflict with FORCE_CON: Re: [PATCH v6 04/11] printk: Support
toggling per-console loglevel via syslog() and cmdline
On Mon 2024-10-28 16:45:40, Chris Down wrote:
> A new module parameter (ignore_per_console_loglevel) is added, which can
> be set via the kernel command line or at runtime through
> /sys/module/printk/parameters/ignore_per_console_loglevel. When set, the
> per-console loglevels are ignored, and the global console loglevel
> (console_loglevel) is used for all consoles.
>
> During sysrq, we temporarily disable per-console loglevels to ensure all
> requisite messages are printed to the console. This is necessary because
> sysrq is often used in dire circumstances where access to
> /sys/class/console may not be trivially possible.
I have just pushed a patchset which removed the console_loglevel
manipulation from sysrq, see
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241105-printk-loud-con-v2-0-bd3ecdf7b0e4@suse.com
As a result, the change in drivers/tty/sysrq.c is not needed anymore.
Note that the other patchset causes some conflict with this patchset.
But they does not seem to be hard to resolved:
1st conflict is in boot_delay_msec(). But the affected logic
has actually been moved to printk_delay(). As a result,
boot_delay_msec() might stay as it is:
static void boot_delay_msec(void)
{
unsigned long long k;
unsigned long timeout;
if (boot_delay == 0 || system_state >= SYSTEM_RUNNING)
return;
k = (unsigned long long)loops_per_msec * boot_delay;
timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(boot_delay);
while (k) {
k--;
cpu_relax();
/*
* use (volatile) jiffies to prevent
* compiler reduction; loop termination via jiffies
* is secondary and may or may not happen.
*/
if (time_after(jiffies, timeout))
break;
touch_nmi_watchdog();
}
}
Instead, we should add check of is_printk_force_console() into
printk_delay(). I suggest to do it the following way:
static bool suppress_message_printing_everywhere(int level)
{
bool suppress_everywhere = true;
struct console *con;
int cookie;
cookie = console_srcu_read_lock();
for_each_console_srcu(con) {
if (!suppress_message_printing(level, con)) {
suppress_everywhere = false;
break;
}
}
console_srcu_read_unlock(cookie);
return suppress_everywhere;
}
static inline void printk_delay(int level)
{
if (!is_printk_force_console() &&
suppress_message_printing_everywhere(level))
return;
boot_delay_msec();
if (unlikely(printk_delay_msec)) {
int m = printk_delay_msec;
while (m--) {
mdelay(1);
touch_nmi_watchdog();
}
}
}
2nd conflict is in printk_get_next_message(). I suggest to do
something like:
force_con = r.info->flags & LOG_FORCE_CON;
/*
* Skip records that are not forced to be printed on consoles and that
* has level above the console loglevel. Never suppress when used in
* devkmsg_read().
*/
if (!force_con && con && suppress_message_printing(r.info->level, con))
goto out;
Actually, I suggested to pass @con_level instead of @con here.
In which case, we might need something like:
if (con) {
is_extended = console_srcu_read_flags(con) & CON_EXTENDED;
con_level = console_srcu_read_loglevel(con);
} else {
/* Used only by devkmsg_read(). Show all messages there. */
is_extended = true;
con_level = CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_MOTORMOUTH;
}
[...]
force_con = r.info->flags & LOG_FORCE_CON;
/*
* Skip records that are not forced to be printed on consoles and that
* has level above the console loglevel.
*/
if (!force_con && suppress_message_printing(r.info->level, con_level))
goto out;
I hope that you find there code snippets useful. I provide them
because I feel a bit guilty that I have already merged the other
patchset... ;-)
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists