From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C858C48BD4 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:45:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38D3221783 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:45:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730802AbfFYIo6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2019 04:44:58 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:41309 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726587AbfFYIo6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2019 04:44:58 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=vostro.local) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1hfh3t-0000XF-62; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:44:21 +0200 From: John Ogness To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Petr Mladek , Steven Rostedt , Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrea Parri , Thomas Gleixner , Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] printk-rb: add a new printk ringbuffer implementation References: <20190607162349.18199-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de> <20190607162349.18199-2-john.ogness@linutronix.de> <20190618045117.GA7419@jagdpanzerIV> <87imt2bl0k.fsf@linutronix.de> <20190625064543.GA19050@jagdpanzerIV> <20190625071500.GB19050@jagdpanzerIV> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:44:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20190625071500.GB19050@jagdpanzerIV> (Sergey Senozhatsky's message of "Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:15:00 +0900") Message-ID: <875zoujbq4.fsf@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019-06-25, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: >>>> + struct prb_reserved_entry e; >>>> + char *s; >>>> + >>>> + s = prb_reserve(&e, &rb, 32); >>>> + if (s) { >>>> + sprintf(s, "Hello, world!"); >>>> + prb_commit(&e); >>>> + } >>> >>> A nit: snprintf(). >>> >>> sprintf() is tricky, it may write "slightly more than was >>> anticipated" bytes - all those string_nocheck(" disabled"), >>> error_string("pK-error"), etc. >> >> Agreed. Documentation should show good examples. > > In vprintk_emit(), are we going to always reserve 1024-byte > records, since we don't know the size in advance, e.g. > > printk("%pS %s\n", regs->ip, current->name) > prb_reserve(&e, &rb, ????); > > or are we going to run vscnprintf() on a NULL buffer first, > then reserve the exactly required number of bytes and afterwards > vscnprintf(s) -> prb_commit(&e)? (As suggested by Petr) I want to use vscnprintf() on a NULL buffer. However, a NULL buffer is not sufficient because things like the loglevel are sometimes added via %s (for example, in /dev/kmsg). So rather than a NULL buffer, I would use a small buffer on the stack (large enough to store loglevel/cont information). This way we can use vscnprintf() to get the exact size _and_ printk_get_level() will see enough of the formatted string to parse what it needs. > I'm asking this because, well, if the most common usage > pattern (printk->prb_reserve) will always reserve fixed > size records (aka data blocks), then you _probably_ (??) > can drop the 'variable size records' requirement from prb > design and start looking at records (aka data blocks) as > fixed sized chunks of bytes, which are always located at > fixed offsets. The average printk message size is well under 128 bytes. It would be quite wasteful to always reserve 1K blocks. John Ogness