Re: [PATCH] printk/nbcon: Restore IRQ in atomic flush after each emitted record

From: John Ogness

Date: Wed Dec 03 2025 - 07:27:41 EST


On 2025-12-02, Leo Yan <leo.yan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I am not really happy about all the local_irq_restore() usage. Using
>> guard syntax would be nice here, but AFAICT there is no guard for
>> local_irq_save()/_restore().
>
> Sorry for suddenly jumping in. Wouldn't guard(irqsave)() be helpful
> here?

Thanks, I was not aware of the irqsave variant. We would want the scoped
version. So something like this?

$ git diff -w
diff --git a/kernel/printk/nbcon.c b/kernel/printk/nbcon.c
index 3fa403f9831f..55beb64c4f4a 100644
--- a/kernel/printk/nbcon.c
+++ b/kernel/printk/nbcon.c
@@ -1557,6 +1557,14 @@ static int __nbcon_atomic_flush_pending_con(struct console *con, u64 stop_seq)
ctxt->allow_unsafe_takeover = nbcon_allow_unsafe_takeover();

while (nbcon_seq_read(con) < stop_seq) {
+ /*
+ * Atomic flushing does not use console driver synchronization
+ * (i.e. it does not hold the port lock for uart consoles).
+ * Therefore IRQs must be disabled to avoid being interrupted
+ * and then calling into a driver that will deadlock trying
+ * to acquire console ownership.
+ */
+ scoped_guard(irqsave) {
if (!nbcon_context_try_acquire(ctxt, false))
return -EPERM;

@@ -1569,6 +1577,7 @@ static int __nbcon_atomic_flush_pending_con(struct console *con, u64 stop_seq)
return -EAGAIN;

nbcon_context_release(ctxt);
+ }

if (!ctxt->backlog) {
/* Are there reserved but not yet finalized records? */

John