From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
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, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] console: Add console=auto option
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 08:54:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8689f544-c905-3542-5d45-2d817cf86283@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180817125714.yekdxxqflmgajf2s@pathway.suse.cz>
On 08/17/2018 08:57 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2018-08-17 07:06:56, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>> On 08/17/2018 06:50 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
>>>> Like I mentioned to Petr, 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.
>>>
>>> x86 people and/or scheduler people might have strong opinions on this.
>>> I Cc-ed Peter Zijlstra; he represents both groups and is known to be
>>> a hardcore earlycon user.
>>
>> Thanks, I'm a user of earlycon too, but only moderately.
>>
>> peterz, to give you an overview: Currently on x86, the SPCR information is only
>> interpreted by the early console code, and can be enabled with kernel parameter
>> "earlycon" (no arguments). In this patch I'm proposing adding "console=auto"
>> that would enable the console based on the SPCR data.
>>
>> There are two options on the table. One, we could go with this patch which
>> would make users do "earlycon console=auto" or, I could just change the
>> behaviour of earlycon (no arguments) to also bring up the console. In the
>> second case the kernel parameter would just be "earlycon". There is precedent
>> for the second option as arm64 enables both the earlycon and console by default
>> if SPCR is present. However, on x86, I know many users do not want the console
>> enabled by default so we should keep it on demand.
>>
>> tl;dr: Pick one
>>
>> Option 1: earlycon enables both the early console and console.
>
> I am afraid that this is not acceptable. Users are sensitive
> when a new kernel suddenly enables different consoles. For example,
> see:
>
> + commit dac8bbbae1d0ccba9 ("Revert "printk: fix double printing with
> earlycon")
>
> + commit c6c7d83b9c9e6a8b3 ("Revert "console: don't prefer first
> registered if DT specifies stdout-path")
>
>
> By other words, the new behavior must depend on a new option.
>
>
>> Option 2: earlycon only enables the early console, and console=auto enables the
>> console.
>
> I suggest:
>
> Option 3: "earlycon" enables early console defined by SPCR
> "console" enables console defined by SPCR
>
> I mean that "console" without extra options would enable the console
> defined by ACPI SPCR. It would work the same as "earlycon" without
> extra options for early consoles.
>
> If you would want to make it explicit than I agree with Sergey
> and would prefer "console=spcr" instead of "console=auto".
I'm going with "console=spcr". FYI.
P.
>
> Note kernel tries to enable some consoles automatically even
> when "console" parameter is not defined at all. Therefore "auto"
> is somehow misleading.
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr
>
> PS: JFYI, I have vacation the following week...
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-29 12:54 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
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 [this message]
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=8689f544-c905-3542-5d45-2d817cf86283@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=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--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®