mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] printk: introduce printing kernel thread
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 20:53:11 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170403115311.GC7867@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170306124554.828-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>

On (03/06/17 21:45), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
[..]
>  printk kthread changes the behavior of printk in one _corner case_.
>  The corner case is quite interesting and actually consists of two corner
>  cases. Suppose on SMP system there is only one CPU that printk()-s a lot,
>  the rest of CPUs don't lock console_sem and don't printk(). Previously
>  that printing CPU had been throttling itself (*) because of console drivers
>  call for every printk():
> 
>           CPU0
> 
>        printk("a")
>         console_unlock()
>          call_console_drivers("a")
> 
>          ...
> 
>        printk("z")
>         console_unlock()
>          call_console_drivers("z")
> 
>  * Given that no other CPU locks the console_sem.
> 
>  With printk kthread the case turns into this one:
> 
>           CPU0                               CPU1
> 
>        printk("a")
>        wake_up printk_kthread
>        ...                               printk_kthread
>        printk("k")                        console_unlock()
>        ...                                 call_console_drivers("a")
>        printk("z")                         call_console_drivers("b")
>                                            call_console_drivers("c")
>                                            ...
> 
> 
>  The second 'corner case' part here is that CPU0 may be much faster
>  than printing CPU, which may result in dropped printk messages.
> 
>  This all is absolutely possible even with out the printk-kthread.
>  A single console_lock() call from CPUx will result in exactly the
>  same condition. So it's not necessarily a regression. But there may
>  be some scenarios in the kernel that may suffer from this change.
>  From the top of my head -- sysrq backtrace dump, and, probably, OOM
>  print out and backtrace dump.

there is another possibility here.

being always reschedulable potentially can put us at risk of having
unpleasant situations when printk_kthread is getting preempted too
often (well, who knows what can happen on the system), which can slow
down logbuf emit process (printk_kthread) up to the point when printk()
CPUs will force log_store() to begin dropping the messages. this can
happen.

	-ss

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-04-03 11:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-06 12:45 Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-06 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] " Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-22 16:40   ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-23  5:12     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-23 10:40       ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-24  5:20         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-06 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] printk: offload printing from wake_up_klogd_work_func() Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-17 12:19   ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-18  9:57     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-20 16:09       ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-21  4:01         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-23  9:00         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-23 12:11           ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-06 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] kernel, power: disable printk_kthread in unsafe places Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-22 15:38   ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-06 12:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] printk: enable printk offloading Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-22 15:43   ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-22 16:40     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-22 17:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] printk: introduce printing kernel thread Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-23  4:09   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-23  8:51     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-24  1:59       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-24  4:43         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-24 14:43         ` Petr Mladek
2017-03-25  0:18           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2017-03-23 12:01   ` Petr Mladek
2017-04-03 11:53 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2017-04-04 12:59   ` Petr Mladek

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=20170403115311.GC7867@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain \
    --to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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®