Re: [PATCH v2] printk: allow direct console printing to be enabled always
From: Jason A. Donenfeld
Date: Sun Jun 19 2022 - 19:28:45 EST
Hi John,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 01:23:04AM +0206, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2022-06-19, "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
> > index c7900e8975f1..47466aa2b0e8 100644
> > --- a/init/Kconfig
> > +++ b/init/Kconfig
>
> Sorry, I missed this in your v1. But I think this config belongs in
> lib/Kconfig.debug under the "printk and dmesg options" menu.
That's better. It helps drive home that it's a debug thing.
> > +static bool printk_direct = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PRINTK_DIRECT);
>
> I understand why you would name the variable to match the boot arg. But
> I would prefer the _internal_ variable had a name that makes it clear
> (to us developers) that it is a permanent setting. Perhaps
> printk_direct_only or printk_direct_always?
Sure, I'll do that. The variable can also be __initdata, since it's only
used inside of an __init function.
> > + if (printk_direct)
>
> I'm wondering if we should output a message here. My suggestion is:
>
> pr_info("printing threads disabled, using direct printing\n");
That seems a bit heavy to me, and just adds more log spam. Moving it
into the debug kconfig zone seems like the right way to handle this
instead.
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > console_lock();
> > printk_kthreads_available = true;
> > for_each_console(con)
>
> Otherwise it looks OK to me. But you may want to wait on a response from
> Petr, Sergey, or Steven before sending a v3. You are adding a kernel
> config and a boot argument. Both of these are sensitive topics that
> require more feedback from others.
Fair enough. It's easy enough to send a v3, and I agree with most of
your suggestions, so I'll send that now, and we'll wait to hear if the
others think it's fine too.
Jason