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 S1751927AbdGEQh5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:37:57 -0400
Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:36290 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751678AbdGEQhz (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:37:55 -0400
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 01:36:03 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>, Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv3 2/5] printk: introduce printing kernel thread
Message-ID: <20170705163603.GA488@tigerII.localdomain>
References: <20170510055935.GA1966@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170529092906.GD21894@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170531072233.GC7672@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170628121925.GN1538@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170629073321.GA475@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170630070131.GA474@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170630131610.GT1538@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20170630133844.GD792@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170703111130.GA836@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170702202733.GB17293@xo-6d-61-c0.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170702202733.GB17293@xo-6d-61-c0.localdomain>
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

Hello,

On (07/02/17 22:27), Pavel Machek wrote:
[..]
> > +#define PRINTK_FLOOD_DEFAULT_DELAY	10
> > +
> >  int printk_delay_msec __read_mostly;
> 
> = 10;

the idea is to throttle printk() only (and as long as) when we see
that something is not right. like when we added 4 (a random number)
times more messages that we were able to print so far. printk_delay_msec
would throttle all printk calls. there is a difference.

there are some cases that are sort of broken with this automatic
throttling. the simples one is printk() under console_lock().
the harder one is throttling printk() from IRQ context. that
can be risky, in theory. may be I'm overcomplicating here; if
the system has hard locked up due to printk throttling from IRQ,
then probably it was going to lockup anyway.

need to check sysrq-t case, tho.

> > +	if (console_seen < 4 * console_to_see) {
> > +		if (printk_delay_msec)
> > +			__printk_delay(printk_delay_msec);
> > +		else
> > +			__printk_delay(PRINTK_FLOOD_DEFAULT_DELAY);
> 
> And get rid of if () here? We want to enable delays of 0...

this if () is totally useless and stupid, yes. realized after I sent
the mail.

	-ss