Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 31 May 2018 17:13:08 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, baijiaju1990@gmail.com,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        SergeySenozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
Subject: Re: Can printk() sleep at runtime?
Message-ID: <20180531171308.08474a70@vmware.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdWbwQ3GKovGGjMv+uWdJBoLYgXHAFj53qLcK1PjHg=0Gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ba98332d-7013-f5cb-7d49-645ee6f49156@gmail.com>
        <20180531100457.fncibp5cxdozvbjh@pathway.suse.cz>
        <CA+55aFxasUXmLwb9Mj1j8WSJbmfO1oGkcsZ2hxxbkz_p1gkUfQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <152777998940.144038.2717154952249020053@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
        <CAMuHMdWbwQ3GKovGGjMv+uWdJBoLYgXHAFj53qLcK1PjHg=0Gg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 31 May 2018 18:42:48 +0200
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
> 
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Quoting Linus Torvalds (2018-05-31 07:32:10)  
> >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:05 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:  
> >> > Anyway, we need to fix or remove this format. vsprintf-like functions
> >> > are called in any context and nobody expect that they might sleep.  
> >>
> >> Ack. I guess the argument is that "%pCr" is rare, and none of *those*
> >> users may care, but I do think that doing things wrong as-is.
> >>
> >> It's too subtle to have to know you're in a particular locking context
> >> when you use a particular %p modifier.  
> >
> > Agreed. Removing the format seems to be the best approach. It looks like
> > only Geert has used it in the last few years and it hasn't been used
> > much otherwise.  
> 
> Indeed, just 3 users (the broadcom one isn't mine):
>     drivers/clk/renesas/renesas-cpg-mssr.c
>     drivers/thermal/broadcom/bcm2835_thermal.c
>     drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
> 
> Alternatively, can we have a special version __clk_get_rate() that just
> returns clk->core->rate?
> Or would that be too inaccurate in the presence of CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE?
> The function could still return 0 in case the flag is set.

If it's only used in three locations, I think it would be better to
simply remove it from vsprintf() and have the three callers call
clk_get_rate() directly.

-- Steve