[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090615185326.GA6057@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:53:28 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WARN(): add a \n to the message printk
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:57:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > NOTE! This is, of course, totally untested. And we're bound to have
> > continuation printk's that don't have the KERN_CONT at front, and need
> > them added, but I think this is generally a saner model than what we have
> > now, or your suggested explicit addition of '\n'.
>
> Ok, it's tested now.
>
> It works, and yes, it does show cases of insanity: both missing KERN_CONT
> (common), and _extra_ KERN_CONT (odd).
>
> For example, the ACPI printk's seem to have pointless KERN_CONT's in them,
> an I get printouts like:
>
> [ 0.000000] <c>ACPI: RSDP 00000000000fe020 00024 (v02 INTEL )
> [ 0.000000] <c>ACPI: XSDT 00000000bf7fe120 0006C (v01 INTEL DX58SO 0000084F 01000013)
> [ 0.000000] <c>ACPI: FACP 00000000bf7fd000 000F4 (v03 INTEL DX58SO 0000084F MSFT 0100000D)
> ...
>
> where that "<c>" is just because ACPI does something odd and pointless.
>
> The lack of KERN_CONT shows up in printouts like
>
> [ 26.626492] CPU: L1 I cache: 32K
> [ 26.626492] , L1 D cache: 32K
> ...
> [ 26.826201] ACPI: (supports S0
> [ 26.826243] S5
> [ 26.826326] )
> ...
> [ 26.839617] ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNKA] (IRQs
> [ 26.839660] 3
> [ 26.839741] 4
> [ 26.839823] 5
> [ 26.839904] 6
> [ 26.839985] 7
> [ 26.840067] 9
> [ 26.840148] 10
> [ 26.840230] *11
> [ 26.840313] 12
> [ 26.840395] 14
> [ 26.840476] 15
> [ 26.840558] )
> ...
> [ 26.964999] ACPI: CPU0 (power states:
> [ 26.965040] C1[C1]
> [ 26.965123] C2[C3]
> [ 26.965205] )
> ...
> [ 27.231268] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.5: MAP [
> [ 27.231309] P0
> [ 27.231390] --
> [ 27.231472] P1
> [ 27.231553] --
> [ 27.231635] ]
> ...
> [ 28.092534] sda:
> [ 28.092820] sda1
> [ 28.092910] sda2
> ...
>
> where the kernel now added a newline because they were separate printk's
> and didn't have KERN_CONT on the continuation.
>
> But despite seeing these kinds of things, I do think the patch is the
> right thing to do. It just shows that since KERN_CONT didn't use to _do_
> anything, people obviously mis-used it. It's the old "if it wasn't tested,
> it's buggy" thing, but none of these look in the least like serious
> problems to the approach.
>
> Comments? We could make it remove the unnecessary '<c>' things (so that
> you can always add KERN_CONT if you _want_ to), but the patch as-is will
> show them because I think it's useful to see them.
>
> Linus
Nice, eventually KERN_CONT have now a real sense.
IMHO it's good to keep <c> in the beginning of the line for misuses like
ACPI does. It provides easy and quick checks to find them.
Frederic.
--
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