From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 11:35:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aPtIUq7hf4R5-qfF@pathway.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251023191442.Uu0mD_Nq@linutronix.de>
On Thu 2025-10-23 21:14:42, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2025-10-23 17:46:58 [+0200], Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Again, quite possibly I am wrong. please see my reply in another thread,
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251023152942.GC26461@redhat.com/
> >
> > On 10/23, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > >
> > > This does not matter. My point is that there no need for this ifdefery.
> >
> > I disagree. Rightly or not. To me this ifdefery in printk.c make the intent
> > more clear.
> >
> > I am still thinking about the possible cleanup of the current usage of
> > DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(), but I think that, whatever we do, this cleanup
> > should take CONFIG_RT into account.
>
> Right. Please just do s/SLEEP/CONFIG as discussed. Please leave
> PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING out of it while arguing why this change is
> correct.
It is clear that the commit message and the comment above the mapping
caused some confusion. I thought about better wording.
I wanted to be as clear as possible, But the problem is that everyone
has different background and might understand the same term
differently. Also I am not a native speaker.
/*
* Some legacy console drivers might violate raw_spinlock/spinlock nesting
* rules when printk() was called under a raw_spinlock and the driver used
* a spinlock. It is not a real problem because the legacy drivers should
* never be called directly from printk() in PREEMPT_RT.
*
* This map is used to pretend that printk() was called under a normal spinlock
* to hide the above described locking violation. It still allows to catch
* other problems, for example, possible ABBA deadlocks or sleeping locks.
*
* The mapping is not used in PREEMPT_RT which allows to catch bugs when
* the legacy console driver would get called from an atomic context by mistake.
*/
And the commit message might be:
<commit_message>
printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT_SLEEP
printk_legacy_map is used to hide possible violations of
raw_spinlock/spinlock nesting when printk() calls legacy console
drivers directly. It is not a real problem in !PREEMPT_RT mode and
the problematic code path should never be called in PREEMPT_RT mode.
However, LD_WAIT_SLEEP is not exactly right. It fools lockdep as if it
is fine to acquire a sleeping lock.
Change DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(printk_legacy_map) to use LD_WAIT_CONFIG.
Also, update the comment to better describe the purpose of the mapping.
</commit_message>
Is this better and acceptable, please?
If not then please provide alternatives ;-)
Best Regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-24 9:35 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
2025-10-23 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-10-23 19:14 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-10-24 9:35 ` Petr Mladek [this message]
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=aPtIUq7hf4R5-qfF@pathway.suse.cz \
--to=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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®