From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 6/7] printk: use printk_safe buffers in printk
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:31:19 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161222053119.GE644@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161221143605.2272-7-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Hello,
On (12/21/16 23:36), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Use printk_safe per-CPU buffers in printk recursion-prone blocks:
> -- around logbuf_lock protected sections in vprintk_emit() and
> console_unlock()
> -- around down_trylock_console_sem() and up_console_sem()
>
> Note that this solution addresses deadlocks caused by printk()
> recursive calls only. That is vprintk_emit() and console_unlock().
several questions.
so my plan was to introduce printk-safe and to switch vprintk_emit()
and console_sem related functions (like console_unlock(), etc.) to
printk-safe first. and switch the remaining logbuf_lock users, like
devkmsg_open()/syslog_print()/etc, in a followup, pretty much
mechanical "find logbuf_lock - add printk_safe", patch. but that
followup patch is bigger than I expected (still mechanical tho);
so I want to re-group.
there are
9 raw_spin_lock_irq(&logbuf_lock)
7 raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&logbuf_lock, flags)
and
12 raw_spin_lock_irq(&logbuf_lock)
8 raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&logbuf_lock, flags)
wrapping each one of them in printk_safe_enter()/printk_safe_enter_irq()
and printk_safe_exit()/printk_safe_exit_irq() is a bit boring. so I have
several options: one of them is to add printk_safe_{enter,exit}_irq() and,
along with it, a bunch of help macros (to printk.c):
(questions below)
/*
* Helper macros to lock/unlock logbuf_lock in deadlock safe
* manner (logbuf_lock may spin_dump() in lock/unlock).
*/
#define lock_logbuf(flags) \
do { \
printk_safe_enter(flags); \
raw_spin_lock(&logbuf_lock); \
} while (0)
#define unlock_logbuf(flags) \
do { \
raw_spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock); \
printk_safe_exit(flags); \
} while (0)
#define lock_logbuf_irq() \
do { \
printk_safe_enter_irq(); \
raw_spin_lock(&logbuf_lock); \
} while (0)
#define unlock_logbuf_irq() \
do { \
raw_spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock); \
printk_safe_exit_irq(); \
} while (0)
so this
printk_safe_enter_irq();
raw_spin_lock(&logbuf_lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock);
printk_safe_exit(flags);
or this
printk_safe_enter_irq();
raw_spin_lock(&logbuf_lock);
...
raw_spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock);
printk_safe_exit_irq();
becomes this
lock_logbuf(flags);
...
unlock_logbuf(flags);
and this
lock_logbuf_irq();
...
unlock_logbuf_irq();
questions:
-- the approach
another solution? switch those raw_spin_{lock,unlock}_irq to irqsave/irqrestore
(?) and use the existing printk_safe_enter()/printk_safe_exit(),
so *_irq() versions of lock_logbuf/printk_safe macros will not be needed?
-- the naming
are lock_logbuf()/unlock_logbuf() and lock_logbuf_irq()/unlock_logbuf_irq()
good enough? (if good at all)
-ss
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-22 5:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-21 14:35 [PATCHv6 0/7] printk: use printk_safe to handle printk() recursive calls Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 14:35 ` [PATCHv6 1/7] printk: use vprintk_func in vprintk() Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 2/7] printk: rename nmi.c and exported api Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 19:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-12-22 1:17 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 3/7] printk: introduce per-cpu safe_print seq buffer Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-22 0:53 ` kbuild test robot
2016-12-22 1:18 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-22 16:36 ` Petr Mladek
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 4/7] printk: always use deferred printk when flush printk_safe lines Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 5/7] printk: report lost messages in printk safe/nmi contexts Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-23 10:54 ` Petr Mladek
2016-12-23 15:08 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 6/7] printk: use printk_safe buffers in printk Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-22 5:31 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2016-12-22 17:10 ` Petr Mladek
2016-12-23 1:46 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-12-23 9:53 ` Petr Mladek
2016-12-21 14:36 ` [PATCHv6 7/7] printk: remove zap_locks() function 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=20161222053119.GE644@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain \
--to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=calvinowens@fb.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).