From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751173AbeAWHbt (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 02:31:49 -0500 Received: from mail-pg0-f68.google.com ([74.125.83.68]:43982 "EHLO mail-pg0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751112AbeAWHbr (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 02:31:47 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224DnMURfGKQmOOAL56y/QV9gZRGdz8p1YYrMuSqSc0qqtv3bAsm3ID//tb7KnltzmVIegadLA== Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:31:43 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Petr Mladek , Tejun Heo , Steven Rostedt , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Cong Wang , Dave Hansen , Johannes Weiner , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Jan Kara , Mathieu Desnoyers , Tetsuo Handa , rostedt@rostedt.homelinux.com, Byungchul Park , Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] printk: Console owner and waiter logic cleanup Message-ID: <20180123073143.GB489@jagdpanzerIV> References: <20180116194456.GS3460072@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20180117091208.ezvuhumnsarz5thh@pathway.suse.cz> <20180117151509.GT3460072@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20180117121251.7283a56e@gandalf.local.home> <20180117134201.0a9cbbbf@gandalf.local.home> <20180119132052.02b89626@gandalf.local.home> <20180120071402.GB8371@jagdpanzerIV> <20180120104931.1942483e@gandalf.local.home> <20180121141521.GA429@tigerII.localdomain> <20180123064023.GA492@jagdpanzerIV> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180123064023.GA492@jagdpanzerIV> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (01/23/18 15:40), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > Why do we even use irq_work for printk_safe? > ... perhaps because of wq: pool->lock -> printk -> call_console_drivers -> printk -> vprintk_safe -> wq: pool->lock Which is a "many things have gone wrong" type of scenario. Maybe we can workaround it somehow, hm. Tejun, can we have lockless WQ? ;) -ss