Re: [PATCH 3/4] printk: Defer printing to irq work when we printedtoo much

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 00:21:51 +0100
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
> Ok I see now.
> 
> But then this irq_work based solution won't work if, say, you run in full dynticks
> mode. Also the hook on the timer interrupt is something that I wish we get rid
> of on archs that can trigger self-IPIs.

Do we really want that? What about users that use LAZY? That is, the
work isn't that important to trigger right now (added interrupt
expense).

> 
> Notwithstanding it's going to have scalibility issues as irq work then converges
> to a single list for unbound works.

Well, it doesn't seem to be something that would be called often. All
CPUs checking a variable that is seldom changed should not have any
scalability issues. Unless of course it happens to share a cache line
with a variable that does change often.

> 
> Offloading to a workqueue would be perhaps better, and writing to the serial
> console could then be done with interrupts enabled, preemptible context, etc...

Oh God no ;-)  Adding workqueue logic into printk just spells a
nightmare of much more complexity for a critical kernel infrastructure.

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