[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:0.028 / U:9.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site