public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 regression fix] printk: For early boot messages check loglevel when flushing the buffer
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:36:09 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180905053609.GA19936@jagdpanzerIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <93901f2b-91ad-a910-7031-0040b827a3af@redhat.com>

On (09/05/18 06:53), Hans de Goede wrote:
> > 
> > Do you use earlycon?
> 
> No, I'm seeing this with the regular/normal console stuff.

OK, thanks for the report!
So I think that your case is CON_PRINTBUFFER related as well. We have
a number of logbuf messages before we parse quiet and console_loglevel.
Those messages pass the suppress_message() test. Then when we finally
register a CON_PRINTBUFFER console we update console_loglevel and flush
all logbuf messages, but console_loglevel does not matter anymore.

> > > This commit fixes this by setting a new LOG_CHK_LEVEL on early boot
> > > messages and doing the loglevel check for these while flushing as before.
> > > 
> > 
> > Hmm, OK, chances are we need to re-think 375899cddcbb. It might be
> > the case that we sort of broke CON_PRINTBUFFER handling.
> > 
> > 	console_loglevel = CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_MOTORMOUTH
> > 	register CON_PRINTBUFFER console
> > 		-> no debug output
> > 
> > So I think that when console_unlock() re-flushes already seen logbuf
> > messages to a newly registered exclusive [CON_PRINTBUFFER] console we
> > probably need to look at the current console_loglevel in console_unlock()
> > loop.
> 
> So if it breaks quiet and the above use-case maybe we should revert
> 375899cddcbb for now?

Maybe all we need to do is to re-introduce suppress_message() check to
console_unlock() when we have exclusive console set (IOW, when we re-flush
logbuf messages to a CON_PRINTBUFFER console).

Just a demonstration of the idea. It does not look very good, tho.
I'd rather have just one suppress_message_printing() in printk code.

// This is not a proposed patch, hence the 80-cols violation.

---

diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
index c036f128cdc3..231ac18423e1 100644
--- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
+++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
@@ -2416,7 +2416,7 @@ void console_unlock(void)
 			break;
 
 		msg = log_from_idx(console_idx);
-		if (msg->flags & LOG_NOCONS) {
+		if (msg->flags & LOG_NOCONS || (exclusive_console && suppress_message_printing(msg->level))) {
 			/*
 			 * Skip record if !ignore_loglevel, and
 			 * record has level above the console loglevel.

---

We are still early in 4.19 -rcs, let's wait a bit and hear from Steven
and Petr, they have bright ideas oftentimes.

	-ss

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-05  5:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-04 18:01 [PATCH 4.19 regression fix] printk: For early boot messages check loglevel when flushing the buffer Hans de Goede
2018-09-05  2:35 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-05  4:53   ` Hans de Goede
2018-09-05  5:36     ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2018-09-05  5:51       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-05  8:33       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-05 11:02         ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-05 15:20           ` Hans de Goede
2018-09-06 14:31             ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-06  7:29           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-06 14:28             ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-07  4:21               ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-10 14:57                 ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-10 15:02                   ` Hans de Goede
2018-09-11  2:30                   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-11  8:47                     ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-12  7:49                       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-12 13:33                         ` Petr Mladek
2018-09-13  2:25                           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-09-06 14:34 ` kbuild test robot

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=20180905053609.GA19936@jagdpanzerIV \
    --to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maninder1.s@samsung.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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