[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Daniel Vetter
console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty much anywhere. Including try_to_wake_up. Note that this isn't common, usually the box is in pretty bad shape at that point already. But it really doesn't help when then lockdep jumps in and spams the logs, potentially obscuring t

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty > much anywhere. Including try_to_wake_up. Note that this isn't common, > usually the box is in pretty bad shape at that point already. But it > really doesn't help when then loc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty > much anywhere. Including try_to_wake_up. Note that this isn't common, > usually the box is in pretty bad shape at that point already. But it > really doesn't help when then loc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Mon 2019-05-06 10:16:14, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty > > much anywhere. Including try_to_wake_up. Note that this isn't common, > > usually the box is in pretty bad shape at that po

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:26:28AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2019-05-06 10:16:14, Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty > > > much anywhere. Including try_to_wake_up. Note that thi

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Mon 2019-05-06 11:38:13, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:26:28AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Mon 2019-05-06 10:16:14, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > console_trylock, called from within printk, can be called from pretty > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-08 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 01:24:48PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2019-05-06 11:38:13, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:26:28AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > On Mon 2019-05-06 10:16:14, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > On Mon 2019-05-06 09:45:53, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > co

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-09 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-05-06 08:45:53) > +/** > + * printk_safe_up - release the semaphore in console_unlock > + * @sem: the semaphore to release > + * > + * Release the semaphore. Unlike mutexes, up() may be called from any > + * context and even by tasks which have never called down(). > +

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-09 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 11:32:57AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-05-06 08:45:53) > > +/** > > + * printk_safe_up - release the semaphore in console_unlock > > + * @sem: the semaphore to release > > + * > > + * Release the semaphore. Unlike mutexes, up() may be called fro

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: console: hack up console_lock more v2

2019-05-09 Thread Petr Mladek
On Wed 2019-05-08 10:17:12, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 01:24:48PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Mon 2019-05-06 11:38:13, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 10:26:28AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > On Mon 2019-05-06 10:16:14, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > > On