Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 8 Oct 2020 19:56:03 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Shreyas Joshi <shreyas.joshi@biamp.com>, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        shreyasjoshi15@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: handle blank console arguments passed in.
Message-ID: <20201008105603.GB554@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <24f7a6bc-c917-2bb7-0e86-9d729c18e812@roeck-us.net>
 <20201006134328.GD32369@alley>
 <20201006163514.GE32369@alley>
 <20201006171504.GA64770@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20201007072853.GF32369@alley>
 <20201007123044.GA509@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <be66237b-e7b2-0321-c00c-cd6fba6e3b58@roeck-us.net>
 <20201007162942.GA440@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20201008055238.GA554@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
 <20201008090155.GB16837@alley>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201008090155.GB16837@alley>
Precedence: bulk

On (20/10/08 11:01), Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> Interesting idea. Well, it looks like yet another mess:
> 
>   + it would show the consoles in /proc/consoles
>     even thought they will be basically unusable

Which is fine, no? We already can have disables consoles in
/proc/consoles.


$ cat /proc/consoles 
tty0                 -WU ( C p  )    4:1

So tty0 is not 'E'-enabled. I see no problems with that.

These are the flags that /proc/consoles handle

	con_flags[] = {
		{ CON_ENABLED,		'E' },
		{ CON_CONSDEV,		'C' },
		{ CON_BOOT,		'B' },
		{ CON_PRINTBUFFER,	'p' },
		{ CON_BRL,		'b' },
		{ CON_ANYTIME,		'a' },
	};

Why do you think that having disabled consoles in /proc/consoles
is a mess?

> IMHO, we should try to understand why it actually crashes first.
> It might help to solve the problem some cleaner way.

Well, I guess, we have files (either regular files or devices) sitting
in fd-s 0,1,2. God knows what mount/fsck/modprobe can fprintf(), for
instance, to stdout/stderr and what they can corrupt.

	-ss