Hi, On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 8:06 AM Mark Rutland <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Doug, > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:57:31PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 4:54 PM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 5:03 PM Douglas Anderson <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > The sound of crickets is overwhelming. ;-) Does anyone have any > > > comments here? Is this a terrible idea? Is this the best idea you've > > > heard all year (it's only been 8 days, so maybe)? Is this great but > > > the implementation is lacking (at best)? Do you hate that this waits > > > for 1 second and wish it waited for 1 ms? 10 ms? 100 ms? 8192 ms? > > > > > > Aside from the weirdness of a processor being killed while holding the > > > console lock, it does seem beneficial to give IRQs at least a little > > > time to finish before killing a processor. I don't have any other > > > explicit examples, but I could just imagine that things might be a > > > little more orderly in such a case... > > > > I'm still hoping to get some sort of feedback here. If people think > > this is a terrible idea then I'll shut up now and leave well enough > > alone, but it would be nice to actively decide and get the patch out > > of limbo. > > > > FWIW the serial console dumping issue that originally inspired me to > > track this down has been worked around at least well enough to not > > spew garbage in my console. See commit 9e957a155005 ("serial: > > qcom-geni: Don't cancel/abort if we can't get the port lock"). It's > > still a little awkward because we'll be running fully lockless during > > panic time, but it seems to work... > > This is on my list of things to look into, but I haven't had the chance to go > through it in detail. > > From a high level, I think this sounds reasonable; I just want to make sure > this doesn't lead to any new surprises...
Sounds good. For now I'll snooze this for another 2 months and if I haven't heard from you then I'll pester you again. There's no crazy hurry, I was just hoping for some sort of decision one way or the other. For now I'll hold off on changing things to match x86 exactly until I get your take on it too. -Doug
