On 2/15/22 11:03, John Ogness wrote: > On 2022-02-14, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 2/14/22 18:25, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 2/14/22 3:45 AM, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote: >>>> Note: do not use this reactor with rq_lock taken, it will lock the >>>> system until printk can handle that. >>> >>> Please give more details on "lock the system" and how locking >>> would impact users and system operation >> >> It is a deadlock on the rq_lock. Hopefully the new printk >> implementation handles that better. > > I suggest using printk_deferred() for this reactor for now. With > printk_deferred() the message and timestamp are immediately and > locklessly stored in the buffer, and the printing is performed in a > separate context. printk_deferred() is safe for all contexts. Question: Does it always postpone or only postpone when in a particular contexts, like, with irqs disabled? -- Daniel > John
