linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Luo Jiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com>,
	sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	john.ogness@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
	linuxarm@huawei.com, bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: stop spining waiter when console resume to flush prb
Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 23:07:19 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJP4F1UIt/eRZ96s@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YJPxj83F1sBjHHAE@alley>

Thanks for Cc-ing Petr

On (21/05/06 15:39), Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> Many printk messages might get accumulated when consoles were suspended.
> They are proceed when console_unlock() is called in resume_console().
> 
> The possibility to pass the console lock owner was added to reduce the risk
> of softlockup when too many messages were handled in an atomic context.
> 
> Now, resume_console() is always in a preemptible context that is safe
> to handle all accumulated messages. The possibility to pass the console
> lock owner actually makes things worse. The new owner might be in an atomic
> context and might cause softlockup when processing all messages accumulated
> when the console was suspended.
> 
> Create new console_unlock_preemptible() that will not allow to pass
> the console lock owner. As a result, all accumulated messages will
> be proceed in the safe preemptible process.

If we have a lot of pending messages in the logbuf, then there is
something chatty - some context (task, irq) or maybe several contexts.
And those contexts can continue adding messages, while we print them
_exclusively_ from preemptible context only. without ever throttling down
printk() callers - something that console_owner spinning and handover
does for us. And those printk() callers can even preempt
console_unlock_preemptible() and cause delays and lost messages.

In this regard, I'm afraid, console_unlock_preemptible() is somewhat
similar, IMHO, to the solution which we reverted - removal of
preempt_disable() before console_unlock() in vprintk_emit().


How about this.

Can we count the number of lines that we print from the `current` context
in console_unlock() and if after N messages there is no console_lock waiter
waiting for the `current` to handover console lock ownership, then create
one: schedule IRQ work that will become a console lock owner, spin on
console lock and call console_unlock() once it acquired the ownership.
That 'artificial' console lock owner will do the same - print N
messages, if nothing wants to become a console lock owner then it'll
queue another IRQ work.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-06 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-06  8:00 [PATCH] printk: stop spining waiter when console resume to flush prb Luo Jiaxing
2021-05-06 13:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-05-07  8:35   ` luojiaxing
2021-05-06 13:39 ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-06 14:07   ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2021-05-06 14:12     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-06 15:14       ` John Ogness
2021-05-07  7:58         ` luojiaxing
2021-05-07  7:33       ` luojiaxing
2021-05-07  7:49         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-07 16:36       ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-10  8:26         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-10 10:17           ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-10 10:32             ` John Ogness
2021-05-10 11:16               ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-10 11:43             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-07 16:13     ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-10  8:29       ` luojiaxing
2021-05-10  9:50         ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-10 12:06           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2021-05-10  7:41   ` luojiaxing
2021-05-10  9:30     ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-11  7:32       ` luojiaxing
2021-05-11  9:08         ` Petr Mladek
2021-05-13  7:55           ` luojiaxing

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=YJP4F1UIt/eRZ96s@google.com \
    --to=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
    --cc=bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com \
    --cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=luojiaxing@huawei.com \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    /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).