mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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...
> 

      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®