- 09 Jun, 2020 40 commits
-
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Keep log_lvl const show_trace_log_lvl() and printk_stack_address() as the new generic show_stack_loglvl() wants to have a proper const qualifier. And gcc rightfully produces warnings in case it's not keept: arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c: In function `show_stack': arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c:294:37: warning: passing argument 4 of `show_trace_log_lv ' discards `const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers] 294 | show_trace_log_lvl(task, NULL, sp, loglvl); | ^~~~~~ arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c:163:32: note: expected `char *' but argument is of type `const char *' 163 | unsigned long *stack, char *log_lvl) | ~~~~~~^~~~~~~ [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com> Signed-off-by:
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200418201944.482088-41-dima@arista.comSigned-off-by:
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). As a nice side-effect - print backtrace in __die() with the same log level as the rest of function. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level parameter to c_backtrace() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl() [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
The pmode parameter isn't used in assembly - remove it. Second argument will be reused for printk() log level. Signed-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
`sp' is a needless excercise here. Signed-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200418201944.482088-35-dima@arista.comSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level parameter to show_trace() as a preparation to introduce show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to printk_address() as a preparation to introduce show_stack_loglvl(). As a good side-effect show_fault_oops() now prints the address with KERN_EMREG as the rest of output, making sure there won't be situation where "PC: " is printed without actual address. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently `data' is always an empty line "". No need for additional printk() call. Signed-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to dump_mem() as a preparation to introduce show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level parameter to microblaze_unwind() as a preparation to add show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to microblaze_unwind_inner() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to ia64_do_show_stack() as a preparation to introduce show_stack_loglvl(). Also, make ia64_do_show_stack() static as it's not used outside. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). As a good side-effect die() now prints the stacktrace with KERN_EMERG aligned with other messages. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200418201944.482088-15-dima@arista.comSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to dump_backtrace() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Now that c_backtrace() always emits correct loglvl, use it for printing. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to dump_backtrace() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl(). As a good side-effect __die() now prints not only "Stack:" header with KERN_EMERG, but the backtrace itself. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to unwind_backtrace() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl(). As a good side-effect arm_syscall() is now printing errors with the same log level as the backtrace. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Add log level argument to c_backtrace() as a preparation for introducing show_stack_loglvl(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). As a good side-effect header "Stack Trace:" is now printed with the same log level as the rest of backtrace. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Currently, the log-level of show_stack() depends on a platform realization. It creates situations where the headers are printed with lower log level or higher than the stacktrace (depending on a platform or user). Furthermore, it forces the logic decision from user to an architecture side. In result, some users as sysrq/kdb/etc are doing tricks with temporary rising console_loglevel while printing their messages. And in result it not only may print unwanted messages from other CPUs, but also omit printing at all in the unlucky case where the printk() was deferred. Introducing log-level parameter and KERN_UNSUPPRESSED [1] seems an easier approach than introducing more printk buffers. Also, it will consolidate printings with headers. Introduce show_stack_loglvl(), that eventually will substitute show_stack(). [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190528002412.1625-1-dima@arista.com/T/#uSigned-off-by:
-
Dmitry Safonov authored
Patch series "Add log level to show_stack()", v3. Add log level argument to show_stack(). Done in three stages: 1. Introducing show_stack_loglvl() for every architecture 2. Migrating old users with an explicit log level 3. Renaming show_stack_loglvl() into show_stack() Justification: - It's a design mistake to move a business-logic decision into platform realization detail. - I have currently two patches sets that would benefit from this work: Removing console_loglevel jumps in sysrq driver [1] Hung task warning before panic [2] - suggested by Tetsuo (but he probably didn't realise what it would involve). - While doing (1), (2) the backtraces were adjusted to headers and other messages for each situation - so there won't be a situation when the backtrace is printed, but the headers are missing because they have lesser log level (or the reverse). - As the result in (2) plays with console_loglevel for kdb are removed. The least important for upstream, but maybe still worth to note that every company I've worked in so far had an off-list patch to print backtrace with the needed log level (but only for the architecture they cared about). If you have other ideas how you will benefit from show_stack() with a log level - please, reply to this cover letter. See also discussion on v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20191106083538.z5nlpuf64cigxigh@pathway.suse.cz/ This patch (of 50): print_ip_sym() needs to have a log level parameter to comply with other parts being printed. Otherwise, half of the expected backtrace would be printed and other may be missing with some logging level. The following callee(s) are using now the adjusted log level: - microblaze/unwind: the same level as headers & userspace unwind. Note that pr_debug()'s there are for debugging the unwinder itself. - nds32/traps: symbol addresses are printed with the same log level as backtrace headers. - lockdep: ip for locking issues is printed with the same log level as other part of the warning. - sched: ip where preemption was disabled is printed as error like the rest part of the message. - ftrace: bug reports are now consistent in the log level being used. Signed-off-by:
Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> Cc: Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> Cc: Paul Burton <paulburton@kernel.org> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Vincent Chen <deanbo422@gmail.com> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Cc: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com> Cc: Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com> Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com> Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> Cc: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru> Cc: Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com> Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> Cc: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com> Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Aurelien Jacquiot <jacquiot.aurelien@gmail.com> Cc: Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com> Cc: Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> Cc: Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp> Cc: Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com> Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Cc: Ley Foon Tan <lftan@altera.com> Cc: Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se> Cc: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com> Cc: Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi> Cc: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com> Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com> Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> Cc: Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku.edu.cn> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net> Cc: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org> Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200418201944.482088-2-dima@arista.comSigned-off-by:
-
