mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 17:52:09 +0206	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tszpbozi.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251023151112.goqBFQcM@linutronix.de>

On 2025-10-23, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:
>> With PREEMPT_RT, legacy console printing is forced into its own
>> dedicated kthread. At runtime this is checked via
>> force_legacy_kthread(). So with PREEMPT_RT there is no need for special
>> lockdep trickery. Once we can get all the consoles switched over to
>> nbcon, !PREEMPT_RT will also not need this lockdep trickery.
>
> This does not matter. My point is that there no need for this ifdefery.
> You say: This might get the nesting wrong but it is fine because the
> outer lock should be this. This does not hurt if it is also applied on
> RT. _BUT_ on RT you don't even trigger this path so this ifdef is not
> needed.

I am more concerned if we implement a bug and the outer lock is _not_
what it should be and RT _does_ call this path. IMHO avoiding
lockdep-forcing when it is not needed is more important than avoiding
the trivial PREEMPT_RT ifdefery. But I will not fight it.

John

  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-23 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-22 15:41 [PATCH] " Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23  7:49 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-23  8:58   ` John Ogness
2025-10-23 10:28     ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23  9:28   ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 10:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 14:26   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-23 15:06     ` John Ogness
2025-10-23 15:11       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-23 15:46         ` John Ogness [this message]
2025-10-23 15:46         ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 19:14           ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24  9:35             ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-24 10:38               ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 12:57                 ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-24 15:15                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-24 10:40     ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-24 10:52       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 11:00         ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-26 15:07 ` [PATCH v3] " Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-27  8:28   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-27  8:37   ` John Ogness
2025-10-29 13:15   ` Petr Mladek
2025-10-29 17:00   ` 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=87tszpbozi.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de \
    --to=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    /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®