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 S1752330AbdF3L5L (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:57:11 -0400
Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:34088 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752253AbdF3L5I (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 30 Jun 2017 07:57:08 -0400
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 20:57:11 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, pmladek@suse.com,
        sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, jack@suse.cz,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
        ebiederm@xmission.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jslaby@suse.com,
        pavel@ucw.cz, andi@lisas.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv3 2/5] printk: introduce printing kernel thread
Message-ID: <20170630115710.GB474@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20170529092906.GD21894@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170531072233.GC7672@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170628121925.GN1538@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170629073321.GA475@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170630070131.GA474@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <201706301918.HFI17946.JtOFLOFQSHOMFV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201706301918.HFI17946.JtOFLOFQSHOMFV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (06/30/17 19:18), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> >         if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_allowed, GFP_KERNEL)) {
> >                 wake_up_process(printk_kthread);
> >                 return true;
> >         }
> 
> Please avoid memory allocations when trying to print something.
> __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM allocations (e.g. GFP_KERNEL) can sleep for
> unpredictable duration. Allocations without __GFP_NOWARN will cause
> e.g. memory allocation failure messages. Even with __GFP_NOWARN,
> some messages might be still printed (e.g. serious problem).

wow... dammit, what a stupid mistake. you are 100% right, thanks!
it's sooo unsafe and dumb, console_unlock() and, thus, offloading
can happen from IRQ.

thanks again.

> > I'm still thinking about Steven's proposals; but we will need offloading
> > anyways, so the bits we are talking about here are important regardless
> > the direction printk design will take, I think.
> 
> Is there a chance that printk() waits for only data queued by that printk()
> call (exception will be printk() from NMI).

hm, I don't think this can be done easily... consider

	console_lock();
	printk();
	printk();
	...			-> this guys will wait forever. nothing
				   flushes the logbuf.
	printk();
	console_unlock();


> If we carry penalty for printk() (charge delay according to amount of
> data queued by that printk()), users will stop doing stupid flooding
> with printk() based on an assumption that offloaded kernel thread will
> manage magically with guarantee of being printed out (i.e. users has
> to become careful).

ratelimiting is on my list. but it's a bit tricky... what should happen
if one does

	CPU1

	-> IRQ
		printk()
			console_unlock();
		printk()
			console_unlock();
		...
		printk()
			ratelimit();
			console_unlock();

	-> NMI panic()


need to think more.

	-ss