Re: printk considered harmful (was: [TECH TOPIC] asynchronous printk)

[Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>]

Hi Jan,

On (11/04/16 00:28), Jan Kara wrote:
[..]
> > I'm still not entirely sure if I want to split async pintk and printk
> > deadlock rework. these things want to come together, for a number of
> > reasons. or, at least, push the async printk before printk deadlock
> > rework.
> 
> Yep, please push async printk patches soon. IMHO there's no reason to wait
> with that. You can create a git tree with printk patches and push it directly
> to Linus since he seems to be fine with the approach...

I'll merge async printk and printk_deferred() patches in one patch set
and then push it (it's just one extra patch in the series; besides we touch
wake_up_klogd_work_func() in async printk anyway), since they really want to
come together. and before async+deferred work I want to push printk_safe. we
already have a somewhat bad experience with printk recursion in async printk,
so I want to stay on the safe side this time.

and, yes, I had this idea of having a printk tree somewhere on github,
so people can start playing with it.

thanks.

	-ss