[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090429072208.GA22129@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:22:08 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ring-buffer: fix printk output
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:09:55 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 07:43:59 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:48:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > - printk_once(KERN_WARNING "Tracing recursion: depth[%d]:"
> > > > > > + printk_once(KERN_WARNING "Tracing recursion: depth[%ld]:"
> > > > >
> > > > > hrmph. I didn't know that printk_once() existed, and I should
> > > > > have known. I wonder how many other people don't know.
> > > >
> > > > Was posted to linux-next@...r.kernel.org.
> > >
> > > Well no wonder I didn't know about it.
> >
> > I (too?) think it's counter-productive that the linux-next list is
> > split out of lkml. I constantly fall into that trap: i get a
> > bugreport against one of our trees, i see that there's vger in the
> > Cc: list and mistake it for being Cc:-ed to lkml (all our trees are
> > developed on lkml and most of the bugreports come Cc:-ed to lkml)
> > but in reality it's Cc:-ed to linux-next which has a much smaller
> > audience. (which audience apparently does not even include you)
> >
> > If this email list fragmentation and the resoluting loss of
> > information bothers you too then please ask Stephen to move
> > linux-next mails to lkml (i've Cc:-ed Stephen) - it's not like it's
> > actually something separate ... today's linux-next messages are
> > tomorrow's lkml messages. Moving linux-next mails to lkml would
> > nicely improve the S/N ratio on lkml.
> >
>
> eh. Just auto-add lkml to tipbot-commit emails?
Yeah - the tip-commits-bot already has such a feature and we are
making use of it - but this commit predates it. So it was posted to
linux-next and the tip-commits list.
My larger point remains, about possibly embedding linux-next into
lkml. I couldnt think of a single linux-next mail that isnt relevant
to lkml. It's all about commits that are destined for upstream in
0-2.5 months.
> printk_once() is racy on smp and preempt btw ;)
Like WARN_ONCE() and WARN_ON_ONCE(). It's really an "oh crap"
facility, not for normal kernel messages.
Do we want to complicate them with locking and preemption - or
should we just concentrate on getting the "oh crap" message out to
the syslog (before it's possibly too late to get anything out)?
I have no strong opinion about it - but i tend to like the simpler
method most. printk + stack dumps themselves arent atomic to begin
with.
Ingo
--
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