[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181001140606.6fa35061@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 14:06:06 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
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 Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:13:17 +0900
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> wrote:
> On (09/28/18 20:21), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > On 2018/09/28 17:56, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > The good thing about cont buffer is that we flush it on panic. E.g.
> > > core/arch early boot stage can do:
> > >
> > > pr_cont("going to call early_init_foo()...");
> > > early_init_foo();
> > > pr_cont("OK\n");
> > >
> >
> > Is printing
> >
> > going to call early_init_foo()...OK
> >
> > in one line so critically important?
>
Yes. My testing infrastructure tests for this on boot up for the ftrace
self tests.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists