[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120616153809.GA8062@kroah.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:38:09 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"kay.sievers" <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Add printk_flush() to force buffered text to
console
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 05:51:27AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-16 at 08:59 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 02:04:30PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > These printk's are useful, are used for a specific (albeit
> > > > limited) purpose and were and continue to be useful in that
> > > > role.
> > > >
> > > > The changes Steve bisected to broke this use of printk().
> > >
> > > And note, fixed others :)
> >
> > Sorry, the "we fix some bugs and introduce others" stance is not
> > a valid response to a regression. Either fix *all* regressions
> > or revert the original change. Simple and robust policy, isn't
> > it?
> >
> > > > Please apply Steve's fix, fix it yourself or revert the
> > > > changes that regressed printk().
> > >
> > > I thought Steve's patch was just a RFC thing, is it really
> > > something that everyone wants to see applied?
> >
> > You mean the adding of an API to flush buffered output when
> > that's the desired outcome? Why the heck should we *not* want
> > that? Either I'm the weird one or you are being difficult ;-)
>
> The API might be better as a global flag
> not a per-site flush.
>
> Maybe printk_is_buffered(true/false)
Hm, that sounds a bit better, and I thin it would solve the timestamp
problem that the proposed patch has, right? We would then just
timestamp on a new line, as we should "know" when that happens?
Steven, do you like this idea better?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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