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 S932463AbdLOPmh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:42:37 -0500
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:47066 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932168AbdLOPme (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:42:34 -0500
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BC5C321877
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:42:31 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv6 00/12] printk: introduce printing kernel thread
Message-ID: <20171215104231.68267192@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20171215083151.cu3xbdgmxqkszwso@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <20171204134825.7822-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
        <20171214142709.trgl76hbcdwaczzd@pathway.suse.cz>
        <20171214152551.GY3919388@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
        <20171214125506.52a7e5fa@gandalf.local.home>
        <20171214181153.GZ3919388@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
        <20171215021024.GA11199@jagdpanzerIV>
        <20171214221831.3ead0298@vmware.local.home>
        <20171215050607.GC11199@jagdpanzerIV>
        <20171215083151.cu3xbdgmxqkszwso@pathway.suse.cz>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:31:51 +0100
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:

> Do people have issues with the current upstream printk() or
> still even with Steven's patch?
> 
> My current view is that Steven's patch could not make things
> worse. I was afraid of possible deadlock but it seems that I was
> wrong. Other than that the patch should make things just better
> because it allows to pass the work from time to time a safe way.
> 
> Of course, there is a chance that it will pass the work from
> a safe context to atomic one. But there was the same chance that
> the work already started in the atomic context. Therefore statistically
> this should not make things worse.
> 
> This is why I suggest to start with Steven's solution. If people
> would still see problems in the real life then we could think
> about how to fix it. It is quite likely that we would need to add
> offloading to the kthreads in the end but there is a chance...
> 
> In each case, I think that is better to split in into
> two or even more steps than introducing one mega-complex
> change. And given the many-years resistance against offloading
> I tend to start with Steven's approach.

THANK YOU!!!

This is exactly what I'm trying to convey.

> 
> Does this make some sense, please?

It definitely does to me :-)

-- Steve