lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [printk] fbc14616f4: BUG:kernel_reboot-without-warning_in_test_stage
On Wed 2017-04-12 01:19:53, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (04/11/17 10:46), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (04/10/17 20:48), Pavel Machek wrote:
> > [..]
> > > > but, once again, I see your point.
> > >
> > > Good. Does that mean that the next version of patches will work ok in
> > > that case?
> >
> > yes.
>
> ok... so I'm looking at something like below right now.
> not really tested yet.
>
> I put some comments into the code.
>
> it does offloading after X printed lines by the same process.
> if we reschedule, then the counter resets. which is probably OK,
> we don't really want any process, except for printk_kthread, to
> stay in console_unlock() forever. "number of lines printed" is
> probably easier to understand (easily converted to the number of
> pageup/pagedown you need to press, terminal buffer history size,
> etc.) than seconds we spent on printing (which doesn't even
> correspond to messages' timestamps in general case).

Design looks good to me... certainly better than previous version :-).


> when the limit of "number of lines printed" is 0, then no
> offloading takes place.

And with "number of lines printed" set to 999999, it will get us
previous behaviour, right?

Thanks,
Pavel

--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-12 20:44    [W:0.097 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site