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 S1752040AbdBCB5l (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 2 Feb 2017 20:57:41 -0500
Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:33179 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751570AbdBCB5k (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 2 Feb 2017 20:57:40 -0500
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:57:57 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>, 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
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 5/8] printk: report lost messages in printk safe/nmi
 contexts
Message-ID: <20170203015757.GB6228@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20161227141611.940-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161227141611.940-6-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20170201113700.5b464143@gandalf.local.home>
 <20170202020257.GB1954@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20170202093409.3d7f617e@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170202093409.3d7f617e@gandalf.local.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (02/02/17 09:34), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:02:57 +0900
> Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On (02/01/17 11:37), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > This looks fine, but I'm curious if you tested it. That is, added a
> > > bunch of printks to overflow the buffer. IIRC, I did it to the original
> > > nmi code. If you haven't you may want to just to make sure it works. I
> > > can also test it too if I get some time.
> > 
> > Hello Steven,
> > 
> > yes, I have tested it on my x86 box.
> > 
> 
> Please note how you tested it in your change log. It's not really a
> requirement, and you don't really have to do it. But it helps people
> have warm fuzzies about the code. I'm trying to do this in the future
> in my own work too.

well. sure, no objections, but in this particular case it's hardly possible
to hit all of those problems within a reasonable time. so what I did was just
a bunch of dirty hacks to provoke the problems. something like this

	extern int XXX;

	vprintk_emit()
	{
		spin_lock(&logbuf_lock);

			//
			// in various places
			//
			if (XXX == 1) {
				WARN_ON(1);
			}

		spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock);
	}

and I set/clear that XXX from one of sysfs attrs... yeah, I know...
but it does what I want. so I'm not really sure I want to note this
in the change log. am I wrong?

	-ss