On Wed 2018-11-07 11:26:56, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 10:23 AM Andy Shevchenko > Ah! Based on who you added to the CC list I guess you meant to CC > "printk" folks? > > PRINTK > M: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> > M: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx> > R: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> > S: Maintained > F: kernel/printk/ > F: include/linux/printk.h > > > I'd be happy to CC those folks on future spins (if there are any). > I'm not convinced that these patches are directly relevant to the > printk subsystem, but I'm always happy for more people to have a > chance to review patches. I, as a printk maintainer, am not completely familiar with all the console driver problems. But we, printk maintainers, come to similar deadlocks from the printk side, so we are definitely interested into this kind of patches. BTW: There was an attempt to avoid the console_unlock() related deadlocks a more generic way, see https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181016050428.17966-1-sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx Unfortunately, there is some push back against introducing a new printk-related-locking API. > Hopefully anyone who needs this patch can find it on one of the > relevant mailing lists. I screwed up and missed LKML this time > around, but there are plenty of other mailing lists here that it could > be found on. If requested I'm also happy to re-post the same series > adding those 3 people if that's what everyone wants. I have glanced over the patches via https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg44083.html I still have to think about it. I will be traveling next week so it might take some time. Anyway, please CC printk people into v2 if any. Best Reagards, Petr
