From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752089AbcHZIU4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 26 Aug 2016 04:20:56 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:36635 "EHLO
        mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750927AbcHZIUy (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 26 Aug 2016 04:20:54 -0400
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:20:48 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>, vlevenetz@mm-sol.com,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async
Message-ID: <20160826082048.GA498@swordfish>
References: <20160818093329.GL13300@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20160818095144.GA425@swordfish>
 <20160818105629.GE26194@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20160819063236.GA584@swordfish>
 <20160819095455.GR13300@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20160819190007.GA8275@quack2.suse.cz>
 <20160820052430.GA695@swordfish>
 <20160822041520.GA511@swordfish>
 <20160825210959.GA2273@dhcp128.suse.cz>
 <20160826015641.GA520@swordfish>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160826015641.GA520@swordfish>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (08/26/16 10:56), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:


> but every lock we take is potentially dangerous as well.
...
> vprintk_emit()
> {
> 	alt_printk_enter();
> 	...
> 	log_store();
> 	...
> 	alt_printk_exit();
> 
> 	wakep_up_process() /* direct from async printk,
> 			      or indirect from console_unlock()->up() */
> 		alt_printk_enter();
> 		... enqueue task
> 		alt_printk_exit();
> }


OTOH, after a very quick thought, up() also takes a spin lock, which
may spindump. so I'll probably prefer to keep the entire alt-printk
thing entirely in printk(). something like this

vprintk_emit()
{
	alt_printk_enter()
	log_store()
	alt_printk_exit()

	if (async_printk)
	{
		alt_printk_enter()
		wake_up_process()
		alt_printk_exit()
	} else {
		if (console_trylock()) {
			console_unlock()
			{
				....
				alt_printk_enter()
				up()
				alt_printk_exit()
			}
		}
	}
}

this leaves console_trylock() `unprotected'. so I guess I'll do
something like this:

	} else {
		int ret;

		alt_printk_enter()
		ret = console_trylock();
		alt_printk_exit()

		if (ret)
			console_unlock();
	}

a bit ugly, but well, it is what it is. will think more about it.

	-ss