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 S1758308AbcLACek (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:34:40 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:36213 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1757927AbcLACei (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:34:38 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 11:34:42 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv4 6/6] printk: remove zap_locks() function
Message-ID: <20161201023442.GH12039@jagdpanzerIV>
References: <20161027154933.1211-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161027154933.1211-7-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161125150113.GJ24103@pathway.suse.cz>
 <20161125151724.GO3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161125151724.GO3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (11/25/16 16:17), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 04:01:13PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Fri 2016-10-28 00:49:33, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > 2) Since commit cf9b1106c81c ("printk/nmi: flush NMI messages on the
> > >    system panic") panic attempts to zap the `logbuf_lock' spin_lock to
> > >    successfully flush nmi messages to `logbuf'.
> > 
> > Note that the same code is newly used to flush also the printk_safe
> > per-CPU buffers. It means that logbuf_lock is zapped also when
> > flushing these new buffers.
> > 
> 
> Note that (raw_)spin_lock_init() as done here and in
> printk_nmi_flush_on_panic() can wreck the lock state and doesn't ensure
> a subsequent spin_lock() of said lock will actually work.
> 
> The very best solution is to simply ignore the lock in panic situations
> rather than trying to wreck it.

do you mean that we can enterily drop the spin_lock_init()? or is there
something else? spin_lock_init() either does not improve anything or let
us to, at least, move the messages from per-CPU buffers to the logbuf. so
it's not like it does some damage, and it can help sometimes. though I
agree that a) we have the messages in the memory already and b) logbuf_lock
is not the one&only troubling lock.

	-ss