From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from shelob.surriel.com (shelob.surriel.com [96.67.55.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C1401BD9C9 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2026 16:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=96.67.55.147 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781194845; cv=none; b=K+49m/nG3QSPD6DCLclYlRidVpjLDViGnI3pgZoHVuJouAEgx1O/F6KB8voJX+G0+ltkLOn4gINYKOwvQXGablWHteEZbaHM/dkp4nSYbK2BjbgGXNyls6KelJCO7nf5E6Ug1MW84IDVwPMxPpDjDwWz4OJBaM/28ctyLqYK6Is= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781194845; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Cn1X4IEWYkOZbuqD9z9nI2GtZaCKRElcEIHb//JL65M=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=YBBNi+BA+kyNbZjLcsEz1wKxIKc7kLOWa6t84R7VFFGw7j4Jmb3TC1hp2TU+bPmSEk+FLv+kJEfR2RmqK42qRckxUjdQJj9Ii9KSwhTx1iNxDZEDOHN7TkZKvmUUYH9wyXdD+9bkPT0NjUAI16BAxYVCrbx+obDcYi8qZsJpZXw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=surriel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=surriel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=surriel.com header.i=@surriel.com header.b=nd/js73Z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=96.67.55.147 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=surriel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=surriel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=surriel.com header.i=@surriel.com header.b="nd/js73Z" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=surriel.com ; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:References: In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Cn1X4IEWYkOZbuqD9z9nI2GtZaCKRElcEIHb//JL65M=; b=nd/js73Z7upkrsc4r/nr1JH573 A+5XHUcLBdXTfbUC+qufGmHULmm5687I959RiWOFJCMQEXWGsI0nJTUpqjtEs8WSdFkFa83h+JZku 9hwuaBHLtTimFUUuwP7ok66etrEfaxfnxfAHJw9sP6fkBcuhgip07UwYV9RfX/MG/DJlDiOaRS3q1 hX9vDBZG0ojSufWrHKqKk+i4K5NGKjXqFXcX7hOlCI+pDuc9Z75AjvI5xvIdNjScastCCF9R8cVK6 Tj+ENXl7+1OixdNm4sfpde/+j9y99YhgYNpTA9MiSu8hDhFrOmO9zc0KdqQI7tVslIMlgdmNx+mey xPxJwbLQ==; Received: from fangorn.home.surriel.com ([10.0.13.7]) by shelob.surriel.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1wXi8p-000000004FD-3a6P; Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:20:27 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] sched: make WARN_ON under rq->lock deadlock-safe (SCHED_WARN_ON) From: Rik van Riel To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, vschneid@redhat.com Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:20:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20260611074344.GG48970@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20260611021416.910555-1-riel@surriel.com> <20260611074344.GG48970@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> Autocrypt: addr=riel@surriel.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata=mQENBFIt3aUBCADCK0LicyCYyMa0E1lodCDUBf6G+6C5UXKG1jEYwQu49cc/gUBTTk33A eo2hjn4JinVaPF3zfZprnKMEGGv4dHvEOCPWiNhlz5RtqH3SKJllq2dpeMS9RqbMvDA36rlJIIo47 Z/nl6IA8MDhSqyqdnTY8z7LnQHqq16jAqwo7Ll9qALXz4yG1ZdSCmo80VPetBZZPw7WMjo+1hByv/ lvdFnLfiQ52tayuuC1r9x2qZ/SYWd2M4p/f5CLmvG9UcnkbYFsKWz8bwOBWKg1PQcaYHLx06sHGdY dIDaeVvkIfMFwAprSo5EFU+aes2VB2ZjugOTbkkW2aPSWTRsBhPHhV6dABEBAAG0HlJpayB2YW4gU mllbCA8cmllbEByZWRoYXQuY29tPokBHwQwAQIACQUCW5LcVgIdIAAKCRDOed6ShMTeg05SB/986o gEgdq4byrtaBQKFg5LWfd8e+h+QzLOg/T8mSS3dJzFXe5JBOfvYg7Bj47xXi9I5sM+I9Lu9+1XVb/ r2rGJrU1DwA09TnmyFtK76bgMF0sBEh1ECILYNQTEIemzNFwOWLZZlEhZFRJsZyX+mtEp/WQIygHV WjwuP69VJw+fPQvLOGn4j8W9QXuvhha7u1QJ7mYx4dLGHrZlHdwDsqpvWsW+3rsIqs1BBe5/Itz9o 6y9gLNtQzwmSDioV8KhF85VmYInslhv5tUtMEppfdTLyX4SUKh8ftNIVmH9mXyRCZclSoa6IMd635 Jq1Pj2/Lp64tOzSvN5Y9zaiCc5FucXtB9SaWsgdmFuIFJpZWwgPHJpZWxAc3VycmllbC5jb20+iQE +BBMBAgAoBQJSLd2lAhsjBQkSzAMABgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRDOed6ShMTe g4PpB/0ZivKYFt0LaB22ssWUrBoeNWCP1NY/lkq2QbPhR3agLB7ZXI97PF2z/5QD9Fuy/FD/jddPx KRTvFCtHcEzTOcFjBmf52uqgt3U40H9GM++0IM0yHusd9EzlaWsbp09vsAV2DwdqS69x9RPbvE/Ne fO5subhocH76okcF/aQiQ+oj2j6LJZGBJBVigOHg+4zyzdDgKM+jp0bvDI51KQ4XfxV593OhvkS3z 3FPx0CE7l62WhWrieHyBblqvkTYgJ6dq4bsYpqxxGJOkQ47WpEUx6onH+rImWmPJbSYGhwBzTo0Mm G1Nb1qGPG+mTrSmJjDRxrwf1zjmYqQreWVSFEt26tBpSaWsgdmFuIFJpZWwgPHJpZWxAZmIuY29tP okBPgQTAQIAKAUCW5LbiAIbIwUJEswDAAYLCQgHAwIGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQznneko TE3oOUEQgAsrGxjTC1bGtZyuvyQPcXclap11Ogib6rQywGYu6/Mnkbd6hbyY3wpdyQii/cas2S44N cQj8HkGv91JLVE24/Wt0gITPCH3rLVJJDGQxprHTVDs1t1RAbsbp0XTksZPCNWDGYIBo2aHDwErhI omYQ0Xluo1WBtH/UmHgirHvclsou1Ks9jyTxiPyUKRfae7GNOFiX99+ZlB27P3t8CjtSO831Ij0Ip QrfooZ21YVlUKw0Wy6Ll8EyefyrEYSh8KTm8dQj4O7xxvdg865TLeLpho5PwDRF+/mR3qi8CdGbkE c4pYZQO8UDXUN4S+pe0aTeTqlYw8rRHWF9TnvtpcNzZw== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Thu, 2026-06-11 at 09:43 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >=20 > Sorry, no. I've said it before and I'll stick with it. Just no. >=20 > printk_deferred() is an abomination, it means that if you mess up the > machine properly you'll *NEVER* see the output. >=20 > As per always, printk() is the one that needs fixing, and IIRC they > were > very close to getting there. Printk to certain console types is always deferred, by default, because trying to synchronously print everything to a slow serial console can lead to a system softlockup panic. In fact, this particular lockup is due to the printk being passed off to a worker thread, and the kernel deadlocking when the wakeup code tries to grab the runqueue lock its CPU already holds. You are right that this could be fixed in the printk code, but the solution there will by necessity continue to contain some deferring. I suppose the printk code could use something like an irq work to wake up the printk worker, and avoid the scheduler deadlock that way? I'm not sure that would make things more reliable, though... --=20 All Rights Reversed.