From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
"Qixuan.Wu" <qixuan.wu@linux.alibaba.com>,
linux-kernel-owner <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
"chenggang.qin" <chenggang.qin@linux.alibaba.com>,
caijingxian <caijingxian@linux.alibaba.com>,
"yuanliang.wyl" <yuanliang.wyl@alibaba-inc.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Would you help to tell why async printk solution was not taken to upstream kernel ?
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:43:58 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180306024358.GC6713@jagdpanzerIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180306015222.GA6713@jagdpanzerIV>
One more thing
On (03/06/18 10:52), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
[..]
> > If you know the baud rate, logbuf size * console throughput is actually
> > trivial to calculate.
It's trivial when your setup is trivial. In a less trivial case if you
set watchdog threshold based on "logbuf size * console throughput" then
things are still too bad.
So this is what a typical printk over serial console looks like
printk()
console_unlock()
for (;;) {
local_irq_save()
call_console_drivers()
foo_console_write()
spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
uart_console_write(port, s, count, foo_console_putchar);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
local_irq_restore()
}
Notice that call_console_drivers->foo_console_write spins on
port->lock every time it wants to print out a logbuf line.
Why does it do this?
In short, because of printf(). Yes, printk() may depend on printf().
printf()
n_tty_write()
uart_write()
uart_port_lock(state, flags) // spin_lock_irqsave(&uport->lock, flags)
memcpy(circ->buf + circ->head, buf, c);
uart_port_unlock(port, flags) // spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
Now, printf() messages stored in uart circ buffer must be printed
to the console. And this is where console's IRQ handler jumps in.
A typical IRQ handler does something like this
static irqreturn_t foo_console_irq_handler(...)
{
spin_lock(&port->lock);
rx_chars(port, status);
tx_chars(port, status);
spin_unlock(&port->lock);
}
Where tx_chars() usually does something like this
while (...) {
write_char(port, xmit->buf[xmit->tail]);
xmit->tail = (xmit->tail + 1) & (UART_XMIT_SIZE - 1);
if (uart_circ_empty(xmit))
break;
}
Some drivers flush all pending chars, some drivers limit the number
of TX chars to some number, e.g. 512.
But in any case, printk() -> call_console_drivers() -> foo_console_write()
must spin on port->lock as long as foo_console_irq_handler() has chars to
TX / RX.
Thus, if you have O(logbuf) of kernel messages, and O(circ->buf) of user
space messages, then printk() will spend O(logbuf) + O(circ->buf) + O(RX).
So the watchdog threshold value based purely on O(logbuf) (printing to
_all_ of the consoles) will not always work.
-ss
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-06 2:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1eb584e2-a479-46dd-8a25-820da7a34e85.qixuan.wu@linux.alibaba.com>
2018-03-04 13:01 ` Would you help to tell why async printk solution was not taken to upstream kernel ? Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-04 15:08 ` Qixuan.Wu
2018-03-04 15:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-05 2:14 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-05 20:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 2:00 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-06 2:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 2:53 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-06 3:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 8:10 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-05 20:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-06 1:52 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-03-06 2:43 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2018-03-06 3:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-03-05 6:56 ` Qixuan.Wu
2018-03-05 13:29 ` Petr Mladek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180306024358.GC6713@jagdpanzerIV \
--to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=caijingxian@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=chenggang.qin@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=qixuan.wu@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yuanliang.wyl@alibaba-inc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox