[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48D159A7.5080907@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:25:27 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] loglevel=pci:8,acpi:8,apic=8 support v6
Jason Baron wrote:
>
> hi,
>
> indeed both proposals seem to be addressing a similar core issue - being
> able to dynamically (as opposed to re-compiling) change the amount of
> verbosity that the kernel spews. I would liken it to adding a -verbose
> flag to the kernel.
>
> Beyond that the 2 approaches differ in a number of ways as I see:
>
8) The ability to accessed filtered messages a posteori (via dmesg),
which is something we currently take for granted.
This *is* the fundamental difference between what Yinghai has now and
both your stuff and Yinghai's original proposal. Not producing the
additional messages at all is inherently cheaper, sometimes *much*
cheaper, but it obviously means the information is not accessible at all.
At the moment, I would argue that the fact that dmesg is, in effect,
more verbose than the kernel itself is a good thing; it makes dmesg
dumps more useful.
-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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists