On Mon 2018-04-23 07:36:03, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:32:32 +0200 > Ug, you're right. Somehow when I looked at where console_owner was set > "console_lock_spinning_enabled" I saw it as "console_trylock_spinning". > > This is what I get when I'm trying to follow three threads at the same > time :-/ They are not easy to follow :-/ > > console_owner is really set only between: > > > > console_lock_spinning_enable() > > console_lock_spinning_disable_and_check() > > > > and this entire section is called with interrupts disabled. > > OK, I agree with you now. Although, one hour may still be too long. I am not sure how slow are the slowest consoles. If I take that everything should be faster than 1200 bauds. Then 10 minutes should be enough for 1000 lines and 80 characters per-line: 1000*80*8/1200/60 = 8.8888888 Alternatively, it seems that we are going to call console drivers outside printk_safe context => the messages will appear in the main log buffer immediately => only small risk of a ping-pong with printk safe buffers. We might reset the counter when all messages are handled in console_unlock(). It will be more complex patch than when using ratelimiting but it still should be sane. Neither solution is perfect. But I think that the recursion is not worth any too complex solution. Best Regards, Petr
