Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] drm: Add support for panic message output

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019-03-14, John Ogness <john.ogness@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2019-03-14, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> That's why we came up with the trylock + immediate bail out design if
>> that fails. Plus really only render the oops int whatever is the
>> current display buffer, so that we don't have to do any hw
>> programming at all.
>
> I think this is your best option. The real work will be identifying
> any/all spin locking that currently exists. For all of those, the code
> needs to change to:
>
> 1. trylock if oops_in_progress, otherwise spinlock

On second thought, you shouldn't use oops_in_progress. It would be
better if DRM had its own flag to signify that it is currently being
used in kmsg_dump context.

> 2. if trylock fails, the code must have a sane failure
>
> The 2nd point will be the difficult one. For example, you may have
> functions without a return value taking spinlocks. But now those
> functions could fail.

John Ogness
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [AMD Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux