linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/3] kmsg: Kernel message catalog macros.

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: <b3ece790808150839i54fde73uf068cb04d4027156@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Aug 2008 08:39:52 -0700
From:	"Tim Hockin" <thockin@...kin.org>
To:	"Jan Blunck" <jblunck@...e.de>
Cc:	"Greg KH" <gregkh@...e.de>, "Joe Perches" <joe@...ches.com>,
	schwidefsky@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	lf_kernel_messages@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Michael Holzheu" <holzheu@...ibm.com>,
	"Gerrit Huizenga" <gh@...ibm.com>,
	"Randy Dunlap" <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	"Jan Kara" <jack@...e.cz>, "Pavel Machek" <pavel@....cz>,
	"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org>,
	"Jochen Voß" <jochen.voss@...glemail.com>,
	"Kunai Takashi" <kunai@...ux-foundation.jp>,
	"Tim Bird" <tim.bird@...sony.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] kmsg: Kernel message catalog macros.

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 4:21 AM, Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, Tim Hockin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > What is wrong with what we have already agreed to standardise on here
>> > people?  dev_printk() for devices!  It uniquely shows the device, what
>> > driver is bound to it (if any), the bus id, and everything else.
>>
>> Part of the problem, imho, is the "if any" part.  But I am more than happy to
>> build on existing solutions.  All the world is not a dev, though.  I'd like to
>> be able to report something like an OOM kill in (roughly) the same way as an
>> ATA error, and I want (though could be talked out of) a way to tell these
>> "events" (for lack of a better word) apart from plain-old-printk()s.
>
> I don't think that he wants to unify all the printk's in the system. I don't
> think that reporting all errors "in the same way as an ATA error" makes any
> sense. That would just lead to very stupid and unnatural messages for all
> errors that are not like "ATA errors". Annotation of existing errors is a much
> more flexible and feasible solution to that problem.

Please don't misinterpret.  I don't want to make other errors parse
like an ATA error, I want to make the plumbing be parallel.  I want
one umbrella mechanism for reporting things that are more important
than just-another-printk().

Because frankly, "parse dmesg" is a pretty crappy way to have to
monitor your system for failures, and I am tired of explaining to
people why we still do that.

Tim
--
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/