[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectMagic SysRq +# in 2.4.9-ac/2.4.10-pre12
(and maybe earlier...)

Simple problems grow...

Keith Owens has already noted one problem in sysrq.c (2.4.10-pre12).


I have an IBM model KB-9910 keyboard. When I use
Alt+SysRQ+number (number: 0...9) on it to change the
console loglevel, only keys 5 and 6 have the desired
effect. I used showkey -s to view the scancodes from
the other <number> keys, but showkey didn't display
anything for them. Any other suggestions?

For now, I'm just using different (non-number) keys
to modify the loglevel.

Anyway, in looking at SysRq loglevel handling in
2.4.9-ac (and 2.4.10-pre12), I see that it has been modified
quite a bit. Looks extensible, which can be good.
However, looking over it gave me several nagging questions
and problems.

1. Was this stuff tested? How ???

It always sets console_loglevel and then restores
console_loglevel from orig_log_level, so Alt+SysRq+#
handling is severely broken.

If someone (Crutcher ?) wants to patch it, that's fine.
If I patched it, I would just add a
next_loglevel = -1;
at the beginning of __handle_sysrq_nolock() and then
let the loglevel handler(s) set next_loglevel.
If next_loglevel != -1 at the end of __handle_sysrq_nolock(),
set console_loglevel to next_loglevel.

2. I'd really prefer to see callers use
register_sysrq_key() and unregister_sysrq_key() so that they
can get/use return values, and not the lower-level functions
"__sysrq*" functions that are EXPORTed in sysrq.c.
I don't see a good reason to EXPORT all of these functions.

E.g., arch/ppc64/start/xmon.c calls __sysrq_put_key_op('x', ...).
It doesn't know (and cannot know) whether this call succeeded
or not.

3. And the sysrq_key_table[] (comments) should end with
w, x, y, z, not with w, x, w, z.


You can't do anything without having to do something else first.
-- Belefant's Law
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.164 / U:0.552 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site