lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 20 Mar 2012 01:46:06 -0400
To:	Joe Perches <>
Cc:	"Ted Ts'o" <>, David Miller <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ext4: Use pr_fmt and pr_<level>

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:02:54 PDT, Joe Perches said:
> On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 22:58 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> [good stuff]
> > Of course, the body of the message needs to be standardized too.  But
> > that's orthogonal to the problem of passing the kernel structure which
> > identifies the object which the log message is about.  That part is
> > completely and utterly necessary if you're going to standardize the
> > *first* part of the printable dmesg log, which contains the structured
> > information.
> All of what you say is true, but you're neglecting
> the ability to scrape or notify a particular set of
> per subsystem messages that pr_<level> could easily
> provide that a bare printk could not.

OK. Say I'm a scraper.  How do I distinguish between:

printk(KERN_INFO "foo");

Oh my. seems that both result in exactly the same thing ending up in the
dmesg buffer, so a scraper can't tell the difference because there isn't any...

pr_<level> isn't currently providing any ability to scrap or notify that can't
be done equally well by a printk.  Now if you fix things so there's actual
advantage to or_<level>, then I'm sure Ted will be willing to listen.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists