[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180620130628.GA1000@tigerII.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 22:06:28 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: inject caller information into the body of
message
On (06/20/18 13:32), Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > So, if we could get rid of pr_cont() from the most important parts
> > (instruction dumps, etc) then I would just vote to leave pr_cont()
> > alone and avoid any handling of it in printk context tracking. Simply
> > because we wouldn't care about pr_cont(). This also could simplify
> > Tetsuo's patch significantly.
>
> Sounds good to me.
Awesome. If you and Fengguang can combine forces and lead the
whole thing towards "we couldn't care of pr_cont() less", it
would be really huuuuuge. Go for it!
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists