From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E8ED3277B4 for ; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 15:17:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761319031; cv=none; b=e/3I/Hy4nWyD96ag1850cRSAAoFavNAeSkfBgC62Z1nHZ5E+jX//RNzmhkHy6bQlggn53dutSuEq7hHIugpoK7L9AAZ2N9IwLLQWeX9a8kT6aONzeLSRosAEz+vFrNfMQjaR4CL7zr14IzEXa+XkEzh0ndUKqSn0mwXhWBI3JXs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761319031; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8Y7SrK0ctZphNN2Pa+hqjmd92v8eIQVCr9RsEOW9zgE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mqRG8X4AhJ3nrFL5iMZAvgsiVuJZMuaQZjthIWWLMZZDe4IaU9oWrZlN85MvZcJnfKf+e+yANS6haEbKBBIJSPdDtYfoxh2pqVy5uZjCq3Estg/hmGbRwbDmaLvYJnXtbkfZZOWIBSvCBTaeIfD1AkdpF6yp+TMp8qV4w1A3FVE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=hAe2Pqc0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="hAe2Pqc0" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1761319026; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NabUNuiOqfPqN9y+bWQU4ZxvJdIaNiEJw8A5/qk23aw=; b=hAe2Pqc0rhvSTd634YqUM7ng2EuIgu4YDraG5ZcJs4qhLzuNrpFGRnG29aU85OsARw2dzU LqYrXALFcCTSSS4y59I5/M6hYyeYsdV7LXvYbm3uAL6/VKYAvF2v8OI40t5qLob7I7xX+d x09/IczNZPwUXJ+NP4I/YyP8yND7bHI= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-600-MqyJmtpcPfq6kUVI0btGgQ-1; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:17:02 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MqyJmtpcPfq6kUVI0btGgQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: MqyJmtpcPfq6kUVI0btGgQ_1761319021 Received: from mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.111]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BC931800637; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 15:17:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.224.19]) by mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B6455180057F; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 15:16:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Fri, 24 Oct 2025 17:15:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 17:15:40 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Petr Mladek Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , John Ogness , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP Message-ID: <20251024151539.GG771@redhat.com> References: <20251022154115.GA22400@redhat.com> <20251023103234.GA27415@redhat.com> <20251023142655.FvZkeSa-@linutronix.de> <87wm4lbqt2.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de> <20251023151112.goqBFQcM@linutronix.de> <20251023154657.GD26461@redhat.com> <20251023191442.Uu0mD_Nq@linutronix.de> <20251024103808.umPAqCda@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.111 So it seems that you guys finally have a consensus on this patch ;) Should I send v3 or will you do it? I don't care about the "From:" tag. If you want me to do it, let me ask: On 10/24, Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Fri 2025-10-24 12:38:08, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > The legacy console always acquires a spinlock_t from its printing > > callback. This violates lock nesting if the caller acquired an always > > spinning lock (raw_spinlock_t) while invoking printk(). This is not a > > problem on PREEMPT_RT because legacy consoles print always from a > > dedicated thread and never from within printk(). Therefore we tell > > lockdep that a sleeping spin lock (spinlock_t) is valid here. > > Looks good to me. Same here. Should I replace the whole comment block above DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(printk_legacy_map) with the text above? > > printk_legacy_map is used to hide lock nesting violations caused by > > legacy drivers and is using the wrong override type. LD_WAIT_SLEEP is > > for always sleeping lock types such as mutex_t. LD_WAIT_CONFIG is for > > lock type which are sleeping while spinning on PREEMPT_RT such as > > spinlock_t. > > Looks goot to me. Same here. Should I add anything else into the changelog? > JFYI, I do not mind which version is used. Same here ;) Oleg.