On (20/09/29 17:09), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 2. The registration and unregistration of consoles should not longer
> >be handled by console_lock (semaphore). It should be possible to
> >call most consoles without a sleeping lock. It should remove all
> >these deadlocks between printk()
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 04:27:51PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Upstreaming the console handling will be the next big step. I am sure
> that there will be long discussion about it. But there might be
> few things that would help removing printk_deferred().
>
> 1. Messages will be printed on consol
On Mon 2020-09-28 12:25:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 06:04:23PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
>
> > Well, you are lucky. So it's a problem in our printk implementation.
>
> Not lucky; I just kicked it in the groin really hard:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel
On (20/09/28 12:25), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[..]
> > printk
> > vprintk_emit
> > console_unlock
> > vt_console_print
> > hide_cursor
> > bit_cursor
> > soft_cursor
> > queue_work_on
> > __queue_work
> > try_to_
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 06:04:23PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> Well, you are lucky. So it's a problem in our printk implementation.
Not lucky; I just kicked it in the groin really hard:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git
debug/experimental
> The deadlock path i
在 2020/9/28 下午5:01, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:54:53PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
>> 在 2020/9/28 下午3:32, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
>>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
def
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:54:53PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
>
> 在 2020/9/28 下午3:32, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> >> The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
> >> deferred by marking the PRINTK_DEFERRED_CONT
在 2020/9/28 下午3:32, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
>> The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
>> deferred by marking the PRINTK_DEFERRED_CONTEXT_MASK, or will cause
>> deadlock on rq lock in the printk path.
> It a
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:00:22AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:52:44AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 09:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> > > > The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:52:44AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 09:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> > > The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
> > > deferred by marking the PRINTK
On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 09:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> > The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
> > deferred by marking the PRINTK_DEFERRED_CONTEXT_MASK, or will cause
> > deadlock on rq lock in the
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 12:11:30AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
> deferred by marking the PRINTK_DEFERRED_CONTEXT_MASK, or will cause
> deadlock on rq lock in the printk path.
It also shouldn't happen in the first place, so who
The WARN_ON/WARN_ON_ONCE with rq lock held in __schedule() should be
deferred by marking the PRINTK_DEFERRED_CONTEXT_MASK, or will cause
deadlock on rq lock in the printk path.
Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou
Signed-off-by: Muchun Song
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(
13 matches
Mail list logo
