[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1404250005020.8903@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:12:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
cc: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cxie@...hat.com,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Print cpu number along with time
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK_CPU
> > + if (!buf)
> > + return snprintf(NULL, 0, "[%5lu.000000,%02x] ",
>
> %02x for a cpu? What happens on machines with 8k cpus?
Ummm ... what issue do you see here, Greg? It'll print 0x1f40, no?
> And is this really an issue? Debugging by using printk is fun, but not
> really something that people need to add a cpu number to. Why not just
> use a tracepoint in your code to get the needed information instead?
Well, if you have dmesg dump from panic that happens every other year, and
you have to do post-mortem analysis on it, I am pretty sure you would love
to be able to figure out how the stack traces would look like without
inter-CPU interleaving. And I am pretty sure you wouldn't want to
insert/enable a tracepoint and wait another two years for the bug to
trigger again.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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