Hi!
> > Hmm, I see this at the beginning of the post-BK era (2.6.12-rc2):
> >
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&logbuf_lock, flags);
> > ...
> > spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock);
> > call_console_drivers(_con_start, _log_end);
> > local_irq_restore(flags);
> >
>
> Well, I need to do some more research. This must be in
> release_console_sem(). I was looking at vprintk, through
> the ages. At 2.6.16, it looked like this:
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&logbuf_lock, flags);
> ...
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&logbuf_lock, flags);
> console_may_schedule = 0;
> release_console_sem();
>
> but the irq restore has been moving around to different places
> in that function over the last few years. I suspect that in the
> common case the irqsave in vprintk is the one that disables
> ints.
>
> It appears that formerly interrupts were enabled in vprintk but
> re-disabled immediately upon entering release_console_sem().
> As it is now, they're held during formatting, buffering,
> and output, which seems excessive.
>
> It seems draconian to drain the entire buffer with ints disabled.
> Is it possible to break this up and send out smaller chunks
> at a time? Maybe by putting a chunk loop in release_console_sem()?
Well, I believe someone got
DDetetccctted ed 113223 HHzz CPUCPU
in his dmesg, and now we have this 'draconian' locking. How can we
prevent mangled messages without it?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
