All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] printk: replace ringbuffer
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 11:11:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200710091137.GN4751@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wo3d9nlo.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>

On Thu 2020-07-09 09:09:31, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2020-07-08, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
> > OK, I think that we are ready to try this in linux-next.
> > I am going to push it there via printk/linux.git.
> >
> > [...]
> > 
> > Of course, there are still many potential problems. The following comes
> > to my mind:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >    + Debugging tools accessing the buffer directly would need to
> >      understand the new structure. Fortunately John provided
> >      patches for the most prominent ones.
> 
> The next series in the printk-rework (move LOG_CONT handling from
> writers to readers) makes some further changes that, while not
> incompatible, could affect the output of existing tools. It may be a
> good idea to let the new ringbuffer sit in linux-next until the next
> series has been discussed/reviewed/merged. After the next series,
> everything will be in place (with regard to userspace tools) to finish
> the rework.

I know that it might be premature question. But I wonder what kind
of changes are expected because of the continuous lines.

Do you expect some changes in the ring buffer structures so that
the debugging tools would need yet another update to actually
access the data?

Or do you expect backward compatible changes that would allow
to pass related parts of the continuous lines via syslog/dev_kmsg
interface and join them later in userspace?

IMHO, it would make sense to wait only when the structures need
some modification. Concatenating related parts on the userspace
side will need to stay optional anyway.

As I say, this might be premature question. I just do not want
to unnecessary delay mainlining the current state. It would get
much wider testing there. And it is great when the changes might
be done in "small" steps.

Best Regards,
Petr

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] printk: replace ringbuffer
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 11:11:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200710091137.GN4751@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wo3d9nlo.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>

On Thu 2020-07-09 09:09:31, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2020-07-08, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
> > OK, I think that we are ready to try this in linux-next.
> > I am going to push it there via printk/linux.git.
> >
> > [...]
> > 
> > Of course, there are still many potential problems. The following comes
> > to my mind:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >    + Debugging tools accessing the buffer directly would need to
> >      understand the new structure. Fortunately John provided
> >      patches for the most prominent ones.
> 
> The next series in the printk-rework (move LOG_CONT handling from
> writers to readers) makes some further changes that, while not
> incompatible, could affect the output of existing tools. It may be a
> good idea to let the new ringbuffer sit in linux-next until the next
> series has been discussed/reviewed/merged. After the next series,
> everything will be in place (with regard to userspace tools) to finish
> the rework.

I know that it might be premature question. But I wonder what kind
of changes are expected because of the continuous lines.

Do you expect some changes in the ring buffer structures so that
the debugging tools would need yet another update to actually
access the data?

Or do you expect backward compatible changes that would allow
to pass related parts of the continuous lines via syslog/dev_kmsg
interface and join them later in userspace?

IMHO, it would make sense to wait only when the structures need
some modification. Concatenating related parts on the userspace
side will need to stay optional anyway.

As I say, this might be premature question. I just do not want
to unnecessary delay mainlining the current state. It would get
much wider testing there. And it is great when the changes might
be done in "small" steps.

Best Regards,
Petr

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-10  9:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-07 14:59 [PATCH v4 0/4] printk: replace ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59 ` John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] crash: add VMCOREINFO macro to define offset in a struct declared by typedef John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59   ` John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] printk: add lockless ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59   ` John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] Revert "printk: lock/unlock console only for new logbuf entries" John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59   ` John Ogness
2020-07-08 14:34   ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-08 14:34     ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09  1:20   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-09  1:20     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-07 14:59 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] printk: use the lockless ringbuffer John Ogness
2020-07-07 14:59   ` John Ogness
2020-07-07 19:25   ` kernel test robot
2020-07-07 19:25     ` kernel test robot
2020-07-07 19:25     ` kernel test robot
2020-07-08 13:18     ` John Ogness
2020-07-08 13:18       ` John Ogness
2020-07-08 13:18       ` John Ogness
2020-07-08 14:35   ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-08 14:35     ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-08 19:24   ` kernel test robot
2020-07-08 19:24     ` kernel test robot
2020-07-08 19:24     ` kernel test robot
2020-07-09  7:14   ` [printk] 18a2dc6982: ltp.kmsg01.fail kernel test robot
2020-07-09  7:14     ` kernel test robot
2020-07-09  8:33     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-09  8:33       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-09 10:14       ` John Ogness
2020-07-09 10:14         ` John Ogness
2020-07-09 10:59         ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 10:59           ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 11:13           ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 11:13             ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 11:17             ` John Ogness
2020-07-09 11:17               ` John Ogness
2020-07-09 12:25               ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 12:25                 ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 13:07                 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-09 13:07                   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-09 14:41                   ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09 14:41                     ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-08 15:20 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] printk: replace ringbuffer Petr Mladek
2020-07-08 15:20   ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-09  7:03   ` John Ogness
2020-07-09  7:03     ` John Ogness
2020-07-10  9:11     ` Petr Mladek [this message]
2020-07-10  9:11       ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-10  9:52       ` John Ogness
2020-07-10  9:52         ` John Ogness
2020-07-10 14:15         ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-10 14:15           ` Petr Mladek
2020-07-14  2:56         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-07-14  2:56           ` Sergey Senozhatsky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200710091137.GN4751@alley \
    --to=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.