On Wed 2018-12-12 01:16:11, Liu, Chuansheng wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tetsuo Handa [mailto:penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 6:02 PM > > To: Liu, Chuansheng <chuansheng....@intel.com>; Sergey Senozhatsky > > <sergey.senozhatsky.w...@gmail.com> > > Cc: a...@linux-foundation.org; pmla...@suse.com; > > sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com; rost...@goodmis.org; dvyu...@google.com; > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/hung_task.c: force ignore_loglevel before panic > > > > On 2018/12/11 10:16, Liu, Chuansheng wrote: > > > We may enhance it by: > > > - if (sysctl_hung_task_warnings) { > > > + if (sysctl_hung_task_panic || sysctl_hung_task_warnings) { > > > if (sysctl_hung_task_warnings > 0) > > > sysctl_hung_task_warnings--; > > > > Why ignore sysctl_hung_task_warnings? The administrator can already > > configure as sysctl_hung_task_warnings == -1 && sysctl_hung_task_panic == 1 > > if he/she does not want to suppress neither sched_show_task() nor > > debug_show_all_locks()/trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(). Someone might want that > > sysctl_hung_task_warnings == 0 (which is a request to suppress only > > sched_show_task()) should not be ignored by sysctl_hung_task_panic == 1 > > (which is a request to trigger panic). > > > My complete idea is in patch V1 which has been sent. Paste here: > If sysctl_hung_task_panic == 1, I will force sched_show_task(t) and set > hung_task_call_panic = true > hung_task_show_lock = true
Please, do not mix two changes into one patch. Add console_verbose() in one patch. It is simple and everyone has agreed with it so far. Force sched_show_task() when hung_task_call_panic == 1 in another patch. It seems to be controversial and should be discussed/changed separately. Best Regards, Petr
