From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753661AbdDCPmk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 3 Apr 2017 11:42:40 -0400
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52141 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752170AbdDCPmN (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 3 Apr 2017 11:42:13 -0400
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 17:42:10 +0200
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Cc: 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 8/8] printk: enable printk offloading
Message-ID: <20170403154210.GG3452@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <20170329092511.3958-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20170329092511.3958-9-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170329092511.3958-9-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed 2017-03-29 18:25:11, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Initialize the kernel printing thread and enable printk()
> offloading.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
> ---
>  kernel/printk/printk.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> index 0d96839bb450..acfdc50580db 100644
> --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> @@ -2796,6 +2796,25 @@ static int printk_kthread_func(void *data)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Init printk kthread at late_initcall stage, after core/arch/device/etc.
> + * initialization.
> + */
> +static int __init init_printk_kthread(void)
> +{
> +	struct task_struct *thread;
> +
> +	thread = kthread_run(printk_kthread_func, NULL, "printk");
> +	if (IS_ERR(thread)) {
> +		pr_err("printk: unable to create printing thread\n");
> +		return PTR_ERR(thread);
> +	}
> +
> +	printk_kthread = thread;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +late_initcall(init_printk_kthread);

I like the simplicity. I just wonder if people on tiny devices might
want to disable it. In each case, it does not make sense on non-SMP
machines or when people force the emergency mode all the time.

I am not sure what is the practice here. I wonder if we should be
proactive or keep it as is and wait until anyone complains. IMHO,
it is not that big deal but...

Best Regards,
Petr