From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759620AbcKCSCm (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2016 14:02:42 -0400 Received: from mail-yb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:35279 "EHLO mail-yb0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756863AbcKCSCl (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2016 14:02:41 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:01:31 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Joe Perches , Jiri Kosina , Theodore Tso , Hannes Reinecke , Jan Kara , Petr Mladek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: printk considered harmful (was: [TECH TOPIC] asynchronous printk) Message-ID: <20161103180131.GC423@swordfish> References: <1478106396.23018.51.camel@perches.com> <20161103173153.GA423@swordfish> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161103173153.GA423@swordfish> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org fix a typo On (11/04/16 02:31), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: [..] > #4 console semaphore > discussion outcome: > we agreed that we can do better here and that it makes sense to do ^^^^ IOW, console semaphore thing can be improved > what's been proposed in my slides. but, I keep it as a low priority. > frankly. I'd be happy to see #1-#3 in the mainline in 9-12 months. ^^^^ #1-#2, of course. but #1 consists of 2 steps. 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. -ss