Received: by 2002:a25:c593:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp1320098ybe; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:43:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx2RxH3ih0tPYRjq6LPMjurnU2u61Bv+bbv/10GANPRIGx7RbtTOQxXG4uoydACOHjCbUIp X-Received: by 2002:aa7:86c8:: with SMTP id h8mr2970387pfo.241.1567716197064; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 13:43:17 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1567716197; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=M6dhL58o5NfTCrrsUtJiKYmf6d7sKPEBzy+tFCbo9NAFCiaZepDvRRlgYHT6UhkfYv yd32AuPL382fuaIKZY3u4yhhQvh5mScm9Z5mJ2zr4ck5SuVhNOdkxnBSIQMlhxPNfv6j EEYlrfGhSc6xL4gBkqy//TrssIIPlfSiJqKo30PqciUEdEWMOgP6+LP44zBOl5ZAZ/8n QYcc2T6h3/jGyd19yINkKq5D1oeCmEM6F8DSUtqMNr4vDcpp6Ysv9ouWC2oMTP7bU6eT KjENL6bkYaDek881FZG4xF6aHAaiKdfm0cz8R4X2MU94yq+RuGMessmDLfYhQnTsGOJb aVJg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:user-agent:references :message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=drwc48AWKgsN4FvhbVIWdgq5EINMSjk3E1pVZ3cw/Wc=; b=baQhgrjipNVSlNHj2zpQFIc27AqZgCbK3TVC34pbP3NRIhbZkH1UA0+33GrJFYAgeL P0Ka1mRp083zhLIksfa2mbK6D2roWbsUsCbKDF6euCeTRp06QD58/NjY88mdxaUQvgut ihg2qPsGivIL9v5cn4audOiqB+I3omBqtctRA2jO8eYf3WdsW+CKGBS3txjmNnsMAjIz +/aBuvu2t+oeXg/H0yzPJan3ruMpN7QoCC4WUkW+MLzZQdnVrVb0FRTzOnTc4c80/+A5 WAXB3zIYwIM5oCUCxMNnU8sav7TW3jxxYSNKvijzxEl3JqM7gz5erYOm4GW4Upo9PBd2 tb8w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e18si2800248pjp.95.2019.09.05.13.43.00; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 13:43:17 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390493AbfIEPi7 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 11:38:59 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:43304 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726120AbfIEPi7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 11:38:59 -0400 Received: from p5de0b6c5.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.182.197] helo=nanos) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1i5tq7-0003cq-81; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 17:38:27 +0200 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 17:38:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Peter Zijlstra cc: Petr Mladek , John Ogness , Andrea Parri , Sergey Senozhatsky , Sergey Senozhatsky , Steven Rostedt , Brendan Higgins , Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/9] printk: new ringbuffer implementation In-Reply-To: <20190905143118.GP2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Message-ID: References: <20190807222634.1723-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de> <20190904123531.GA2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20190905130513.4fru6yvjx73pjx7p@pathway.suse.cz> <20190905143118.GP2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:05:13PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > The alternative lockless approach is still more complicated than > > the serialized one. But I think that it is manageable thanks to > > the simplified state tracking. And I might safe use some pain > > in the long term. > > I've not looked at it yet, sorry. But per the above argument of needing > the CPU serialization _anyway_, I don't see a compelling reason not to > use it. > > It is simple, it works. Let's use it. > > If you really fancy a multi-writer buffer, you can always switch to one > later, if you can convince someone it actually brings benefits and not > just head-aches. Can we please grab one of the TBD slots at kernel summit next week, sit down in a room and hash that out? Thanks, tglx