Message-ID: <4DED18FD.4@die-jansens.de>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 20:14:21 +0200
From: Arne Jansen <lists@die-jansens.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, mingo@redhat.com,
        hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de,
        npiggin@kernel.dk, akpm@linux-foundation.org, frank.rowand@am.sony.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [debug patch] printk: Add a printk killswitch to robustify NMI
 watchdog messages
References: <1307372989.2322.136.camel@twins> <1307375227.2322.161.camel@twins> <20110606155236.GA7374@elte.hu> <1307376039.2322.164.camel@twins> <20110606160810.GA16636@elte.hu> <1307376771.2322.168.camel@twins> <20110606161749.GA22157@elte.hu> <1307378649.2322.198.camel@twins> <20110606171153.GE2391@elte.hu> <4DED1519.2020803@die-jansens.de> <20110606180733.GA20123@elte.hu>
In-Reply-To: <20110606180733.GA20123@elte.hu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1802
Lines: 62

On 06.06.2011 20:07, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Arne Jansen<lists@die-jansens.de>  wrote:
>
>> On 06.06.2011 19:11, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>
>>> * Peter Zijlstra<peterz@infradead.org>   wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> +void printk_tick(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	if (!__this_cpu_read(printk_pending))
>>>> +		return;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * Try to acquire and then immediately release the
>>>> +	 * console semaphore. The release will do all the
>>>> +	 * actual magic (print out buffers, wake up klogd,
>>>> +	 * etc).
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	if (console_trylock_for_printk(smp_processor_id())) {
>>>> +		console_unlock();
>>>> +		__this_cpu_write(printk_pending, 0);
>>>> +	}
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Arne does this fix the hang you are seeing?
>>
>> What do you want me to test? just replace printk_tick with the
>> above version? If I do that, the machine doesn't even boot up any
>> more.
>
> Yeah.
>
> So i think we want two patches:
>
>   - The first one that minimally removes the lockdep_off()/on() dance
>     and fixes the regression: the patch that i sent earlier today.
>     I *think* that should fix the crash.

Isn't the regression just the false lockdep_assert_held(&p->pi_lock)?
The patch Peter sent earlier seems like the minimal changeset to fix
that, plus it fixes a bug that might pop up somewhere else, too.

>
>     3.0 material.
>
>   - The second one that moves console_sem wakeups to the jiffies tick.
>     It does not push the acquiring and the console->write() calls to
>     jiffies context, only delays the wakeup.
>
>     3.1 material.
>
> Thanks,
>
> 	Ingo

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/