lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 2/3] printk: set may_schedule for some of console_trylock callers
On Sat 2016-02-13 03:37:11, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> console_unlock() allows to cond_resched() if its caller has
> set `console_may_schedule' to 1, since
> 'commit 8d91f8b15361 ("printk: do cond_resched() between lines while
> outputting to consoles")'.
>
> The rules are:
> -- console_lock() always sets `console_may_schedule' to 1
> -- console_trylock() always sets `console_may_schedule' to 0
>
> However, console_trylock() callers (among them is printk()) do
> not always call printk() from atomic contexts, and some of them
> can cond_resched() in console_unlock(), so console_trylock()
> can set `console_may_schedule' to 1 for such processes.
>
> For !CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT kernels, however, console_trylock()
> always sets `console_may_schedule' to 0.
>
> It's possible to drop explicit preempt_disable()/preempt_enable()
> in vprintk_emit(), because console_unlock() and console_trylock()
> are now smart enough:
> a) console_unlock() does not cond_resched() when it's unsafe
> (console_trylock() takes care of that)
> b) console_unlock() does can_use_console() check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>

It looks safe after all.

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>

Best Regards,
Petr

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-16 16:21    [W:3.135 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site