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;
From:   John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To:     Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
Cc:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com>,
        Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>,
        Andrew Gabbasov <andrew_gabbasov@mentor.com>,
        Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>,
        Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Fix quiet console in pre-panic scenarios
References: <20200315170903.17393-1-erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
        <20200316143517.651abbeb@gandalf.local.home>
        <20200316190948.7peesqnx6yhpzdpl@linutronix.de>
        <20200318145600.GA20301@lxhi-065.adit-jv.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:40:27 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20200318145600.GA20301@lxhi-065.adit-jv.com> (Eugeniu Rosca's
        message of "Wed, 18 Mar 2020 15:56:00 +0100")
Message-ID: <87sgi5n02c.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

On 2020-03-18, Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 08:09:48PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> On 2020-03-16 14:35:17 [-0400], Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > I don't see any issues with this patch set. What do others think?
>> > 
>> > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
>> > 
>> > [ Note, I only acked, and did not give a deep review of it ]
>> 
>> What is the state of the other larger printk rework? If this does not
>> solve any -stable related issues then it will be replaced?
>
> Is this a question to John and his most recent series in
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200128161948.8524-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de/
> ?
>
> Is there any upstream agreement to already keep the current printk
> mechanism away from any updates?

No. Fixes are welcome!

The only thing we are trying to avoid at this stage is massive
refactoring/cleanup work. Your series does not fit into that category.

As to my opinion on this series, assuming it is acceptable for the
maintainers, I would like to see console_verbose() become an alias to
console_verbose_start(). Then @ignore_loglevel would be used for both
and CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_MOTORMOUTH could be removed.

John Ogness