From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>,
Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
x86@kernel.org, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] console: Add console=auto option
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 06:26:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00c60dca-60bc-8568-eaa3-d4b0c326cab4@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180817081947.m425gok2ugt7tglp@pathway.suse.cz>
On 08/17/2018 04:19 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2018-08-16 13:39:01, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>> ACPI may contain an SPCR table that defines a default system console.
>> On ARM if the table is present then the SPCR console is enabled by default.
>> On x86 the SPCR console is used if 'earlycon' (no parameters) is
>> specified as a kernel parameter and is used only as the early console.
>> To use the SPCR data as a console a user must boot with 'earlycon',
>> grep logs & specify a console= kernel parameter, and then reboot again.
>>
>> Add 'console=auto' that enables a firmware or hardware console, and on
>> x86 enable the SPCR console if 'console=auto' is specified.
>
> I basically like the idea. Just one or two nits below.
>
>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
>> index a32f2a126791..dd057224f33b 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
>> @@ -635,6 +635,7 @@
>>
>> hvc<n> Use the hypervisor console device <n>. This is for
>> both Xen and PowerPC hypervisors.
>> + auto [X86] Enable ACPI SPCR console
>
> The "auto" option sounds reasonable. But earlycon does exactly this
> when used without no extra options. I prefer to stay consistent
> with the existing earlycon behavior.
Hi Petr, on x86 earlycon still only enables the early console but does not
enable the console.
>
>
>> If the device connected to the port is not a TTY but a braille
>> device, prepend "brl," before the device type, for instance
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> index 3b20607d581b..fb2616ba3b21 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
>> @@ -1771,3 +1771,8 @@ void __init arch_reserve_mem_area(acpi_physical_address addr, size_t size)
>> e820__range_add(addr, size, E820_TYPE_ACPI);
>> e820__update_table_print();
>> }
>> +
>> +void __init arch_console_setup(void)
>> +{
>> + acpi_parse_spcr(false, true);
>
> Just for record. I was curious that this might be called twice
> (also from acpi_boot_init(). But it looks safe after all.
>
Yes, the console code prevents the same console from being registered twice.
> The trick is in the two bool parameters. One call allows to
> register/enable earlycon and ignores normal console. This other
> call does exactly the opposite. I do not see any unwanted side
> effects.
Thanks. I'd like to know if you (or anyone else) has strong feelings about
changing the behaviour of earlycon on x86? I could make it so that specifying
just earlycon would also initialize the console.
P.
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-17 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-16 14:10 [PATCH] " Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-16 15:09 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-08-16 15:28 ` Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-16 15:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-08-16 17:23 ` Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-16 17:39 ` [PATCH v2] " Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-17 8:19 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-17 10:26 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2018-08-17 9:38 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-17 10:36 ` Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-17 10:50 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-08-17 11:06 ` Prarit Bhargava
2018-08-17 12:57 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-29 12:54 ` Prarit Bhargava
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=00c60dca-60bc-8568-eaa3-d4b0c326cab4@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=msalter@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®