From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932489Ab1LOJ5w (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2011 04:57:52 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:37820 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932297Ab1LOJ5u convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2011 04:57:50 -0500 Message-ID: <1323943005.18942.18.camel@twins> Subject: Re: printk() vs tty_io From: Peter Zijlstra To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Ted Ts'o" , Alan Cox , Greg KH , linux-kernel , Ingo Molnar Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:56:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1323804803.9082.40.camel@twins> <20111214104308.14d0500c@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <1323860206.28489.35.camel@twins> <20111214140527.GA18080@thunk.org> <1323872631.28489.37.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 07:54 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Ugh. There is a *ton* of stuff inside that serial port lock, > including, yes, the uart_write_wakeup(). > > And it does look like it's protecting port->tty or something, so I > don't see that we can just move the wakeup to outside the lock, which > was my first reaction. We probably could, I can have a closer look, but the main question is, are we going to commit to no wakeups from console implementations? That would mean removing the USB serial console support and other such stuff. [ Personally I think USB serial console is insane, if you really need something like that use the ehci-dbgp thing, that at least has a chance of working. ] If we're not going to commit to that (which would be valid choice given where we are), my printk efforts are pointless and I'll reconsider.