[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c7a9c83c-524d-c0da-a355-6cd4b7ec690c@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 23:12:49 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@...com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] printk: Introduce per-console loglevel setting
Petr Mladek wrote:
> It might be even more straightforward when the per-console value
> defines the effective console level. I mean the following semantic:
>
> + "console_loglevel" would define the default loglevel used
> by consoles at runtime.
>
> + the per-console loglevel could override the default
> console_loglevel.
>
> + We would need a custom handler for the sysctl "console_loglevel".
> It would write the given value to the global console_loglevel
> variable and for all already registered consoles (con->loglevel).
But some functions change console_loglevel without sysctl (e.g.
console_verbose() when reporting hung tasks and panic()). Should
con->loglevel be changed (which might result in too much messages to
slow consoles) when console_loglevel changes?
>
> The value will be used also for all newly registered consoles
> when they do not have any custom one.
>
>
> + The handler for "loglevel" early param should behave the same
> as the sysctl handler.
>
>
> IMHO, there is no perfect solution. The advantage of the above
> proposal is that you "see" and "use" exactly what you "set".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists