[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120409160803.27bc1376.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 16:08:03 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk(): add KERN_CONT where needed
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:00:10 +0200
Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org> wrote:
> > Maybe it'd be better to aggregate content rather like
> > printk does. __Aggregate until you get a newline or a
> > new KERN_<LEVEL>
>
> The continuation printk() can can always go wrong when multiple
> threads do that in parallel. We can try to make it better with a
> per-cpu buffer, but I guess there will always be a situation where
> this can happen.
Maybe we can be a bit smarter. For example, if `current' is unchanged
and __builtin_return_address(0) is unchanged, keep on buffering.
It's all a bit hacky, but weeding out all those thousands of printks
which never get printed anyway doesn't sound much fun either.
> - printk(")");
> + printk(KERN_CONT ")");
And I do think we should avoid doing it that way, if only because it
consumes 10 display columns and makes a mess. Maybe use pr_cont()?
But that implies that the affected code is using the pr_foo()
facilities, and a lot of it doesn't. So maybe a new macro.
All a bit of a pain.
--
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