[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1219843631-26015-1-git-send-email-trenn@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:27:08 +0200
From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
To: ak@...ux.intel.com
Cc: bjorn.helgaas@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arjan@...ux.intel.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
ckornacker@...e.de
Subject: Introduce interface to report BIOS bugs (reworked, FW_BUG simple solution)
Even simplier, using FW_BUG define. I agree that the first implementation
was over-designed, I somehow liked the printk_fw_err() and printk_fw_info()
more, looked somehow more consistent with:
#define pr_info(fmt, arg...) \
printk(KERN_INFO fmt, ##arg)
(and others).
Hmm, it shouldn't really matter.
I wonder whether it works out that messages are hidden to the ordinary
user with printk(KERN_INFO FW_BUG...).
Something that vendors get an idea that they should not do this, but
hiding it on a normally booted system is needed (but e.g. show it on a
linuxfirmwarekit booted kernel).
printk(KERN_DEBUG FW_BUG...)
Won't work because there you get too much output?
Are these patches sufficient to achieve above?
Thomas
PS: Forgot to add Pavel to CC who also commented on previous patches,
it's work to do it right now, I expect you read this anyway.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists