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 S1758260AbcLAMwE (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 1 Dec 2016 07:52:04 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:34635 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1757442AbcLAMwC (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 1 Dec 2016 07:52:02 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 21:50:45 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv4 6/6] printk: remove zap_locks() function
Message-ID: <20161201125045.GA404@tigerII>
References: <20161027154933.1211-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161027154933.1211-7-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20161125150113.GJ24103@pathway.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161125150113.GJ24103@pathway.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

On (11/25/16 16:01), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> > apart from detecting and reporting printk recursions, that code also
> > used to zap_lockc() in case of panic. However, zap_locks() does not
>        	          ^
> 
> s/zap_lockc/zap_locks/
> 
> > look to be needed anymore:
> > 
> > 1) Since commit 08d78658f393 ("panic: release stale console lock to
> >    always get the logbuf printed out") panic flushing of `logbuf' to
> >    console ignores the state of `console_sem' by doing
> >    	panic()
> > 		console_trylock();
> > 		console_unlock();
> > 
> > 2) Since commit cf9b1106c81c ("printk/nmi: flush NMI messages on the
> >    system panic") panic attempts to zap the `logbuf_lock' spin_lock to
> >    successfully flush nmi messages to `logbuf'.
> 
> Note that the same code is newly used to flush also the printk_safe
> per-CPU buffers. It means that logbuf_lock is zapped also when
> flushing these new buffers.


not quite. there are several checks that would prevent multiple logbuf_lock
re-inits:


        if (in_nmi() && raw_spin_is_locked(&logbuf_lock)) {
                if (num_online_cpus() > 1)
                        return;

                debug_locks_off();
                raw_spin_lock_init(&logbuf_lock);
        }


	-ss