"Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja@xxxxxx> writes: > Acquire console lock before enabling and writing to console-uart > to avoid any recursive prints from console write. > for ex: > --> printk > --> uart_console_write > --> get_sync > --> printk from omap_device enable > --> uart_console write > > Use RPM_SUSPENDING check to avoid below scenario during bootup > As during bootup console_lock is not available. > --> uart_add_one_port > --> console_register > --> console_lock > --> console_unlock > --> call_console_drivers (here yet console_lock is not released) > --> uart_console_write > > Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Govindraj.R <govindraj.raja@xxxxxx> > --- > drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++- > 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > index 897416f..ee94291 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > @@ -1008,7 +1008,22 @@ serial_omap_console_write(struct console *co, const char *s, > struct uart_omap_port *up = serial_omap_console_ports[co->index]; > unsigned long flags; > unsigned int ier; > - int locked = 1; > + int console_lock = 0, locked = 1; > + > + if (console_trylock()) > + console_lock = 1; So now we take the console lock on *every* console write? Even if the device is not about to be idled? This is rather over-protective, don't you think? > + /* > + * If console_lock is not available and we are in suspending > + * state then we can avoid the console usage scenario s/in suspending state/runtime suspending/ > + * as this may introduce recursive prints. > + * Basically this scenario occurs during boot while > + * printing debug bootlogs. The exact scenario for triggering this still not well described, and thus still I don't get it. I still don't fully understand this problem, but if it's isolated to runtime suspending, maybe you need a console lock in the runtime_suspend path (like you already have in the static suspend path.) > + */ > + > + if (!console_lock && > + up->pdev->dev.power.runtime_status == RPM_SUSPENDING) > + return; Assuming this was a printk, it's now lost, right? Not sure that's an acceptable solution. > local_irq_save(flags); > if (up->port.sysrq) > @@ -1044,6 +1059,9 @@ serial_omap_console_write(struct console *co, const char *s, > if (up->msr_saved_flags) > check_modem_status(up); > > + if (console_lock) > + console_unlock(); > + > serial_omap_port_disable(up); > if (locked) > spin_unlock(&up->port.lock); Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
