lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] printk: Poke printk extra hard

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> >
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK_DEBUG
> > +void printk_init(void)
> > +{
> > +       struct rq *rq;
> > +       unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > +       local_irq_save(flags);
> > +       rq = this_rq();
> > +       raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
> > +       printk(KERN_DEBUG "printk: echo echo echo..\n");
> > +       raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> > +       local_irq_restore(flags);
>
> Ok, I can't really say that I think this is worth a config option like this.
>
> Maybe an example module or something?
>
> And I don't know *why*, but my immediate reaction to the
> message was that it either should be serious and say what it
> tested ("printk() works under rq lock"), or it should say
> "Bork bork bork". "echo echo echo" sounds just stupid.

We could perhaps use the standard mike test message:

printk: Tap, tap, is this thing on?

Thanks,

Ingo
--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-22 08:07    [W:0.069 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site