[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160405073932.GA513@swordfish>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 16:39:32 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] printk: Make printk() completely async
On (04/05/16 14:17), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
[..]
> > Could do with a comment explaining why late_initcall was chosen.
>
> late_initcall was chosen because of workqueue early_initcall, and
> I just decided not to change it when I switched from wq to a
> dedicated printk kthread. late_initcall seemed to be OK. can do
> init_printk_kthread() somewhere in init/main start_kernel().
or rather move it a bit earlier. core_init sounds appropriate;
or postcore. don't want to export yet another printk symbol.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists