Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] Use printk_safe context for TTY and UART port locks
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <hidden>
Date: 2018-06-23 05:21:57
Also in:
lkml
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <hidden>
Date: 2018-06-23 05:21:57
Also in:
lkml
On (06/22/18 17:21), Alan Cox wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:44:13 +0900 Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:34 AM Steven Rostedt [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Perhaps we should do an audit of the console drivers and remove all printk, pr_* , WARN*, BUG* from them.Only the actual _printing_ parts.No because they are normally rather useful because that port isn't the console. If you trylock
trylock is boring, me wants printk_safe_mask everywhere :)
Really that's all that you need - log the message to whichever console targets you can currently safely do so. If it's none well there was always the proposed morse code keyboard light driver 8)
Hm, just discard messages? With printk_safe_mask we keep everything in a lockless per-CPU buffer, which we flush [per-CPU buffer -> printk logbuf] from irq_work, so we can print it later. -ss