From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758826AbbGHREK (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2015 13:04:10 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42790 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754796AbbGHREG (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2015 13:04:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 19:04:02 +0200 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Gavin Hu Cc: Petr Mladek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alex Elder , "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" , Joe Perches , Peter Hurley , Tejun Heo , cxie4@marvell.com, cldu@marvell.com, xjian@marvell.com, fswu@marvell.com, Jan Kara Subject: Re: printk: preempt_disable with long time resulting in softlockup/RCU stall issues Message-ID: <20150708170402.GZ7021@wotan.suse.de> References: <20150708081334.GJ32664@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 05:08:35PM +0800, Gavin Hu wrote: > Hi, > > Yes. We should disable the printk_limit feature when panic to avoid missing > messages. Sounds like you have been looking into it and have a good idea of what you want to do, why not try it and send some RFC patches ? While at it, then we could consider doing different things depending on the message type. KERN_EMERG would disable preemption, whereas KERN_INFO may not be so critical to require it. Luis