Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (08/23/16 14:19), Petr Mladek wrote:
> > the other thing I just thought of is doing something as follows
> > !!!not tested, will not compile, just an idea!!!
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/printk/printk.c b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > index 6e260a0..bb8d719 100644
> > --- a/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > +++ b/kernel/printk/printk.c
> > @@ -1789,6 +1789,7 @@ asmlinkage int vprintk_emit(int facility, int level,
> >         printk_delay();
> >  
> >         local_irq_save(flags);
> > +       printk_nmi_enter();
> >         this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> 
> Huh, this looks very interesting but I am afraid that it will not fly.
> The problem is that vprintk_nmi() is safe only when it is used
> exclusively in NMI.
> 
> The following could happen with your code:

sure. I took NMI as a quick and easy example that did not require a lot
of words to explain because you guys are familiar with NMI printing.
the thing is - we don't have to share the same buffer with the actual NMI,
but instead have our own small 'alternative-printk' per-cpu buffers (a page
or two, perhaps). it's up to `printk_func' that we set up at the entry point
and flush function that we execute later. vprintk_nmi() writes to
this_cpu_ptr(&nmi_print_seq), vprintk_alter() will write to
this_cpu_ptr(&alt_print_seq), for example. the same with flushing:
printk_nmi_flush reads in from per_cpu(nmi_print_seq); alter-printk flush
can read from per_cpu(alt_print_seq).

[..]
> The lockless handling of the NMI per-CPU buffer already is not
> trivial. I would be afraid to add more hacks to make
> it writable in all contexts.

yes. we can reuse the idea of NMI printk and most of the code. the thing
we really care is `struct nmi_seq_buf' assigned to this particular CPU,
and there can be several seq_buffer-s.

> I am sorry about the bad news. This was so promising on the first
> look.

it's not dead yet ;)

	-ss