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 S932839AbcI3LfR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:35:17 -0400
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:47391 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932303AbcI3LfK (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:35:10 -0400
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 13:35:08 +0200
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/7] printk: introduce per-cpu alt_print seq buffer
Message-ID: <20160930113508.GK26796@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <20160927142237.5539-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20160927142237.5539-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20160929122639.GD26796@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20160930010528.GB547@swordfish>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160930010528.GB547@swordfish>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri 2016-09-30 10:05:28, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (09/29/16 14:26), Petr Mladek wrote:
> [..]
> > >  printk()
> > >   local_irq_save()
> > >   alt_printk_enter()
> > 
> > We need to make sure that exit() is called on the same CPU.
> > Therefore we need to disable preemption as well.
> 
> local_irq_save() does this for us, we can't get sched tick or
> re-sched IPI, and even more - we eliminate race conditions on
> this CPU. only one path can touch alt_printk related stuff,
> NMI works with its own buffer.
> 
> [..]
> > What do you think about my approach with the printk_context per-CPU
> > value from the WARN_DEFERRED() patchset? The main idea is that
> > the entry()/exit() functions manipulate preempt_count-like per-CPU
> > variable. The printk() function selects the safe implementation
> > according to the current state.
> 
> I'll take a look.
> 
> I'll revisit it.

Just a side note. If you make it less generic then please use some more
meaning-full name for the alternative printk stuff. The following
comes to my mind:

	     printk_safe_enter();
	     printk_safe_exit();
	     vprintk_safe();

IMHO, the "_safe" suffix often means a variant that prevents a
possible deadlock.

I wonder where this patches would end but it looks promising.

Best Regards,
Petr