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:   Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:16:03 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
        sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        john.ogness@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk: fix deadlock when kernel panic
Message-ID: <YCNB492X/HcFT5xl@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20210206054124.6743-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
 <YCJTrrirMlH7M5i7@alley>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YCJTrrirMlH7M5i7@alley>
Precedence: bulk

On (21/02/09 10:19), Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sat 2021-02-06 13:41:24, Muchun Song wrote:

[..]

> What about the following commit message? It uses imperative language
> and explains that the patch just prevents the deadlock. It removes
> some details. The diagram is better than many words.
> 
> <commit message>
> printk_safe_flush_on_panic() caused the following deadlock on our server:
> 
> CPU0:                                         CPU1:
> panic                                         rcu_dump_cpu_stacks
>   kdump_nmi_shootdown_cpus                      nmi_trigger_cpumask_backtrace
>     register_nmi_handler(crash_nmi_callback)      printk_safe_flush
>                                                     __printk_safe_flush
>                                                       raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&read_lock)
>     // send NMI to other processors
>     apic_send_IPI_allbutself(NMI_VECTOR)
>                                                         // NMI interrupt, dead loop
>                                                         crash_nmi_callback
>   printk_safe_flush_on_panic
>     printk_safe_flush
>       __printk_safe_flush
>         // deadlock
>         raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&read_lock)

[..]

I would also add to the commit message that it avoids the deadlock
_in this particular case_ at expense of losing contents of printk_safe
buffers. This looks important enough to be mentioned.

	-ss