linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [RFC] be more verbose when probing EDD

lists.openwall.net		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]

Message-ID: <476705CD.4020405@zytor.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:27:09 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@...il.com>, devzero@....de,
	Matt.Domsch@...l.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] be more verbose when probing EDD

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Dec 16 2007 20:18, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> Why tax other people with a warning/hang etc. in printk when the
>>> problem is very unlikely on their systems?
>> I think there is sense in it if you do it subtly differently.
>>
>> 	printk(".. if this hangs do ... \r");
>> 	edd_stuff();
>> 	printk("                          \r");
>> 	
>>
>> So that we display it, do the EDD call, then write over it with whatever
>> is next that matters.
> 
> Does printk support escape sequences? The last time I tried
> printk("\e[1;35m omg ponies \e[0m"); that did not went too successful.
> 

Uh, no.  Do that and anyone trying to interpret logs will beat you to 
death with a pickled herring.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/