Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:09:48 -0800 | | From | Andrew Morton <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] CON_BOOT |
| |
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote: > > I think it's doable > if we do something like: > > - Add an int (*takeover)(struct console *); to struct console > - Replace the hunk above with: > > for (existing = console_drivers; existing; existing = existing->next) { > if (existing->takeover && existing->takeover(console)) { > unregister_console(existing); > console->flags &= ~CON_PRINTBUFFER; > } > } > > That puts the onus on the early console to be able to figure out > whether a registering console is its replacement or not; for the x86_64 > early_printk, that'd be as simple as comparing the ->name against "ttyS" > or "tty". It'll be a bit more tricky for PA-RISC, but would solve some > messiness that we could potentially have. I think that's doable; want > me to try it?
It doesn't sound terribly important - I was just curious, thanks. We can let this one be demand-driven.
I'm surprised that more systems don't encounter this - there's potentially quite a gap between console_init() and the bringup of the first real console driver. What happens if we crash in mem_init()? Am I misreading the code, or do we just get no info? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |