From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..."
<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Threaded printk breaks early debugging
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 18:05:08 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yqb9xOBiY/262lhk@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wndlge43.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
On (22/06/13 10:36), John Ogness wrote:
> >> IMHO, no. Especially in that situation, we do not want printk causing
> >> that atomic section to become even longer. If the machine has entered
> >> normal operation, we want printk out of the way.
> >
> > At the same time printk throttles itself in such cases: new messages are
> > not added at much higher pace that they are printed at. So we lower the
> > chances of missing messages.
>
> That is true if there is only 1 printk caller.
Well, which is the case when num_online_cpus() == 1?
> For SMP systems with printing handovers, it might not help at all.
> I firmly believe that sprinkling randomness into printk (i.e. system)
> latencies is not the answer. We need to keep printk lockless and out
> of the system's way unless there is a real emergency happening.
Yeah sure.
> This particular thread is not about missed messages due to printk not
> "throttling the system", but rather the kernel buffers not getting
> flushed in an emergency. This, of course, needs to be properly handled.
True, but Peter mentioned
"I noticed with threading enabled during large bursts the console
drops an excessive amount of messages. It's especially apparent
during the handover from earlycon to the normal console."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-13 9:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-10 12:48 [BUG] Threaded printk breaks early debugging Peter Geis
2022-06-10 15:05 ` John Ogness
2022-06-10 15:34 ` Peter Geis
2022-06-12 2:57 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2022-06-12 13:30 ` Peter Geis
2022-06-12 23:08 ` John Ogness
2022-06-12 23:30 ` Peter Geis
2022-06-13 2:23 ` John Ogness
2022-06-13 15:11 ` Petr Mladek
2022-06-13 22:20 ` Peter Geis
2022-06-14 8:38 ` Petr Mladek
2022-06-13 11:24 ` Petr Mladek
2022-06-12 3:13 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2022-06-12 23:02 ` John Ogness
2022-06-13 3:49 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2022-06-13 8:30 ` John Ogness
2022-06-13 9:05 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2022-06-13 10:14 ` Petr Mladek
2022-06-13 16:11 ` David Laight
2022-06-14 8:37 ` 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=Yqb9xOBiY/262lhk@google.com \
--to=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=pgwipeout@gmail.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.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