[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <848qi6kbrf.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 12:50:04 +0206
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, Steven Rostedt
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, Mike Galbraith
<efault@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v1 1/1] printk: nbcon: Allow unsafe
write_atomic() for panic
On 2025-09-17, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
>> After weighing the pros/cons I think that a global variable makes the
>> most sense. It will simplify internal APIs and provide all
>> console_is_usable() users a correct value. And the end result is no
>> different than what we do now.
>>
>> We could also keep its setting inside nbcon_atomic_flush_unsafe() so
>> that the variable remains a printk-internal variable.
>
> Sounds good to me.
Right now things are a bit of a mess with required changes sitting in
printk and mm trees. Since this won't be going in to the upcoming merge
window, I will wait with v2 until you (Petr) can officially rebase the
printk tree to include the recent panic_*cpu*() changes. That will also
make it easier to coordinate the upcoming console_is_usable() changes as
well.
The functionality for v2 is the same as the v1, so the network folks can
continue working on the nbcon netconsole implementation.
@Breno: Or were you planning on pushing the nbcon netconsole for the 6.18
merge window next week? (I would guess no.)
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists