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:6.206 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site