[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y7gEVpMTvI0WzPH7@alley>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 12:21:58 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v4 0/8] printk: cleanup buffer handling
On Thu 2023-01-05 11:43:27, John Ogness wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is v4 of a series to cleanup console buffer handling and
> prepare for code sharing with the upcoming threaded/atomic
> consoles. v3 is here [0].
>
> The main purpose of the series is to introduce two new lockless
> functions to handle reading and formatting of printk messages. These
> functions can then be used from any context, which is important for
> the upcoming threaded/atomic consoles. The series also helps to
> cleanup some of the internal printk interfaces and cleanly separate
> formatting code from outputting code.
>
> John Ogness (6):
> printk: move size limit macros into internal.h
> printk: introduce struct printk_buffers
> printk: introduce printk_get_next_message() and printk_message
> printk: introduce console_prepend_dropped() for dropped messages
This patch would need a followup fix to prevent the compiler warning.
> printk: use printk_buffers for devkmsg
This one would need respin to fix the problem with suppressed messages.
> printk: adjust string limit macros
>
> Thomas Gleixner (2):
> console: Use BIT() macros for @flags values
> console: Document struct console
The rest looks ready for linux-next.
I see three ways how to move forward:
1. Respin the entire patchset.
2. Respin only 7th patch + send the follow up fix seperately
3. Push first 6 patches and handle the rest separately.
What would be more convenient for you, please?
Honestly, I do not have any real preference.
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists