Re: [RFC][PATCHv2 7/8] printk: add printk emergency_mode parameter

From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@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>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv2 7/8] printk: add printk emergency_mode parameter
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 17:29:30 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170404082930.GC470@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170403152921.GF3452@pathway.suse.cz>

On (04/03/17 17:29), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> > +module_param_cb(emergency_mode,
> > +		&printk_kthread_disabled_ops,
> > +		&printk_kthread_disabled,
> > +		0644);
> > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(emergency_mode,
> > +		"don't offload message printing to printk kthread");
> 
> I wonder if we could make this easier. Something like:
> 
> static bool printk_force_emergency;
> module_param_named(force_emergency, printk_force_emergency,
> 		   bool, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR);

yes, can do. thanks.

> and use it instead of printk_kthread_disabled variable. It was
> confusing anyway. You already mentioned that it did not
> stop the kthread.

yeah, I didn't like the `printk_kthread_disabled' naming, but
at the same time didn't feel like having `printk_emergency' and
`printk_forced_emergency'. will take a look.

	-ss