From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752783AbdKHQWd (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:22:33 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:58322 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752256AbdKHQWc (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:22:32 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 27386218B4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:22:29 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Tejun Heo Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Sergey Senozhatsky , Petr Mladek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Subject: printk: Don't trap random context in infinite log_buf flush Message-ID: <20171108112229.200858cb@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20171107132331.GJ3252168@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> References: <20171102135146.GN3252168@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20171102135258.GO3252168@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20171104042408.GB539@tigerII.localdomain> <20171107002254.GI3252168@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20171107020434.GC1822@jagdpanzerIV> <20171107132331.GJ3252168@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 05:23:50 -0800 Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Sergey. > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 11:04:34AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > just to make sure. there is a typo in Steven's patch: > > > > while (!READ_ONCE(console_waiter)) > > > > should be > > > > while (READ_ONCE(console_waiter)) > > > > is this the "tweaking" you are talking about? > > Oh, I was talking about tweaking the repro, but I'm not sure the above > would change anything. No, it would change an awful lot. It would cause two printers to access the consoles at the same time, which would lead to unpredictable behavior. -- Steve