[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <200907101028.03153.rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:28:03 -0400
From: Robin Getz <rgetz@...ckfin.uclinux.org>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Boot Consoles question...
On Fri 10 Jul 2009 06:28, Ingo Molnar pondered:
>
> * Robin Getz <rgetz@...ckfin.uclinux.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat 4 Jul 2009 12:07, Robin Getz pondered:
> > > On Sat 4 Jul 2009 06:29, Ingo Molnar pondered:
> > > > Could be changed i guess ... but is it really an issue?
> > >
> > > It is just a change from "normal" (when the kernel has no boot
> > > console).
> > >
> > > > One artifact
> > > > could be manual scroll-back - it would perhaps be nice indeed to
> > > > allow the scrollback to the top of the bootlog.
> > >
> > > Exactly.
> > >
> > > One of my thoughts (was since CON_PRINTBUFFER isn't used after
> > > register_console()) - was for the CON_BOOT's CON_PRINTBUFFER flag to
> > > control the clearing of the CON_PRINTBUFFER for the real console or
> > > not...
> > >
> > > All early_printk consoles that I looked at have their
> > > CON_PRINTBUFFER set.
> > >
> > > Which means that something like should do the trick -- allow people
> > > who want
> > > to override things to do so, and still have the today's setup work
> > > as is...
> >
> > I guess no one liked that idea?
>
> No, this means no-one objected :)
Silence is consensus?
> > How about at least making sure that the real console gets a
> > message that something is on the bootconsole? Right now the switch
> > message:
> >
> > console handover:boot [early_shadow0] -> real [ttyBF0]
> >
> > only is printed on the bootconsole, not on the real console - so
> > someone looking at the real console may not know there is anything
> > on the boot console. They just think that things are missing...
>
> Mind sending a full (changelogged, titled, etc.) patch for the other
> bit as well? It kind of overlaps this one but both make sense,
> especially if people end up objecting against the more intrusive one
> and it gets dropped/reverted ;-)
Will do - (as soon as I get my system up and running again - moved buildings,
so still unpacking)...
--
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