[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1231380626-20597-4-git-send-email-apw@canonical.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 02:10:26 +0000
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] sysrq: add commentary on why we use the console loglevel over using KERN_EMERG
Add an explanitory comment as to why we modify the kernel console
loglevel rather than simply moving sysrq messages to KERN_EMERG level.
Signed-off-by: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
---
drivers/char/sysrq.c | 6 ++++++
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/sysrq.c b/drivers/char/sysrq.c
index d41b9f6..33a9351 100644
--- a/drivers/char/sysrq.c
+++ b/drivers/char/sysrq.c
@@ -473,6 +473,12 @@ void __handle_sysrq(int key, struct tty_struct *tty, int check_mask)
unsigned long flags;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sysrq_key_table_lock, flags);
+ /*
+ * Raise the apparent loglevel to maximum so that the sysrq header
+ * is shown to provide the user with positive feedback. We do not
+ * simply emit this at KERN_EMERG as that would change message
+ * routing in the consumers of /proc/kmsg.
+ */
orig_log_level = console_loglevel;
console_loglevel = 7;
printk(KERN_INFO "SysRq : ");
--
1.6.0.4.911.gc990
--
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