Re: [PATCH printk v2 5/8] printk: nbcon: Add sequence handling
From: John Ogness
Date: Tue Aug 29 2023 - 07:52:13 EST
On 2023-08-10, Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> void console_flush_on_panic(enum con_flush_mode mode)
>> {
>> + struct console *c;
>> bool handover;
>> - u64 next_seq;
>> + short flags;
>> + int cookie;
>> + u64 seq;
>> +
>> + seq = prb_first_valid_seq(prb);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Safely handle the atomic consoles before trying to flush any
>> + * legacy consoles.
>> + */
>
> This is a bit weird because the loop below just sets sequence
> number for NBCON consoles. But they are not really flushed.
>
> I think that you already agreed with it for v3. But let me mention
> it here for completeness.
>
> I would prefer to just add the API and use it later when some
> particular action get supported. And the flush could not do
> anything until nbcon_write() callback is added.
Actually I agreed with this for v2, but didn't take it far enough. I now
also agree that console_flush_on_panic() should not be modified at all
until the actual flushing functions are available.
>> @@ -3829,7 +3846,9 @@ static bool __pr_flush(struct console *con, int timeout_ms, bool reset_on_progre
>> if (!console_is_usable(c))
>> continue;
>>
>> - if (locked)
>> + if (flags & CON_NBCON)
>> + printk_seq = nbcon_seq_read(c);
>> + else if (locked)
>> printk_seq = c->seq;
>> else
>> continue;
>
> I think that I mentioned this already in a previous patch. The "else
> continue" path is bad. It allows quietly skip messages for classic
> consoles when "locked" is false. I know that it should not happen
> but...
>
> A solution would be to add WARN_ON_ONCE() before the continue.
I like the WARN_ON_ONCE() suggestion. For v3 I will do:
if (flags & CON_NBCON) {
printk_seq = nbcon_seq_read(c);
} else {
WARN_ON_ONCE(!locked);
printk_seq = c->seq;
}
>> +static bool nbcon_seq_try_update(struct nbcon_context *ctxt)
>> +{
>> + struct console *con = ctxt->console;
>> + u64 con_seq = nbcon_seq_read(con);
>> +
>> + while (con_seq < ctxt->seq) {
>
> What if anyone called nbcon_seq_force() to reply the entire log
> in the meantime?
>
> IMHO, we should remember the original nbcon_seq before
> the context handle a line. And this function should update
> nbcon_seq only when it has not been changed by other context
> in the meantime.
Makes sense. I will do that for v3.
John