[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Event logging vs enhancing printk
On 9 April 2002 18:49, Brian Beattie wrote:
> I would prefer to see effort expended on fixing printk/ the
> top of my head:
> - make printk a macro that prepends file/function/line to the message.
> - fix printk calls: messages with consistent format, calls in the right
> places, with the "correct" information.
> - postprocessing tools for analysing the logs.
> I would say that this is probably less work than implementing evlog,
> much less work to maintain, and provide generally better performance.

Sounds ok for me.

It will be difficult to push it into mainline kernel.
I tried to fix loglevels in some printks. Patches were _trivial_
but nevertheless they weren't taken.
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 13:25    [W:0.065 / U:11.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site