Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:28:36 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCHv5 3/7] printk: introduce per-cpu safe_print seq buffer |
| |
On (12/12/16 14:54), Petr Mladek wrote: [..] > > > Hmm, I wanted to describe why we need another per-CPU buffer in NMI > > > and I am not sure that we really need it. > > > > NMI-printk can interrupt safe-printk's vsnprintf() in the middle of > > the "while (*fmt)" loop: safe-priNMI-PRINTK > > But this already happens when any of the WARNs is triggered > inside vsnprintf(). Either this is safe or we are in > trouble. [..] > Well, I am not sure if we should bother.
well, I'd probably agree that we shouldn't care. I'd may be even say that nested warnings from vsnprintf() are not so important to over-complicated everything (comparing to lost NMI-printk messages, which are really important).
> Well, is it that bad to ask for better comments?
ok, I'll take a look. gotta re-base the series once again anyway.
> Or am I dumb and it was all obvious?
of course no! I never said that. never! :) my apologies.
-ss
| |