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
next prev parent 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®