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 S936223AbcKDQIX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 4 Nov 2016 12:08:23 -0400
Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:34763 "EHLO
        mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932299AbcKDQIV (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 4 Nov 2016 12:08:21 -0400
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 01:07:13 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
        Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: printk considered harmful (was: [TECH TOPIC] asynchronous printk)
Message-ID: <20161104160640.GC422@swordfish>
References: <1478106396.23018.51.camel@perches.com>
 <20161103173153.GA423@swordfish>
 <20161103180131.GC423@swordfish>
 <20161103232827.GE24234@quack2.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161103232827.GE24234@quack2.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

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