Messages in this thread | | | From | Kay Sievers <> | Date | Thu, 10 May 2012 23:01:21 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/3] printk: convert byte-buffer to variable-length record buffer |
| |
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 22:39 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> Nah, we can't do that. We need it to tell "here is your non-prefix to >> parse, leave the data behind alone". > > That's where I think you're still a bit > uncertain how the _current_ printk system > works. > Your _new_ printk system should > have identical behavior.
We must be at least as good as we are, sure.
But the aim is to be *better* not to be *identical*, especially when things go wrong, and they do go wrong far too often in the current code. What we have today is really not good enough. We have a lot of context during logging (like the thread), and we should use it to make the best out of it _before_ we log the stuff away.
> Though if you > manage to use the call tree and current to > coalesce complete messages more correctly, > that'd be great.
That's what we try. We just need to get all the details out of the peoples heads, which are nowhere written down, to make it happen. It's a bit of a painful process sometimes. :)
The conversion from the "put all bytes in a bag and let's find out later what happened"-buffer to a real separated record buffer imposed some changes to the logic, and we need to restore/adapt some useful rules now, which could't be preserved 1:1. But I'm confident that we manage to get a better overall picture in the end.
Kay -- 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/
| |