Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice driver | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 27 Sep 2002 12:32:08 +0100 |
| |
On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 23:55, Larry Kessler wrote: > At the risk of reading more into your suggestion than you intended... > Are you supportive of adding infrastructure into the kernel that > provides, conceptually at least, the sort of things that Rusty and > I (and others) are after ?
Sort of. We have a problem about consistently reporting which device. So dev_printk(dev, ...) is printk that formats up the device info for you. Its also easy to use and happens to pass a device pointer into the places you want it for more detailed logging
> Provide a reasonable and printk-like interface (like you've > shown above), that writes to printk if advanced logging is not > configured; but, if advanced logging is configured...
I'm trying to make sure the right data is available. I don't *care* what you do with it after it gets thrown at you. If I have to care what you are doing with the data the interface is wrong.
> 1) It will take time for device drivers to migrate to a new interface
Who cares. Migrate the devices you care about one at a time, test them and worry about just those. Do you need 120 highly available network card drivers. Do you need telco grade soundblaster 16 ?
> 3) we should avoid modifying current printk behavior
We don't. We add an extra helper that builds on it in a totally logical fashion. The existing one doesnt break, its merely something to be polished when needed by the folks who care
> 4) advanced logging must be an optional feature to avoid the overhead > where its not wanted or needed
And dev_printk is going to be under 1K. What you do with the data isnt my problem.
> 5) User-space utilities already exist (evlog.sourceforge.net)
Again, this is about what you do with the data for your cases. dev_printk is about making the info available cleanly
> and of course, mindful that the 2.5 window is closing in 1 month.
For core code changes for 2.6 base Linus tree. So you end up with a set of patches you add over time. I would note however that the default dev_printk() routine that just reformats up as
<level>%s: message
is not exactly taxing to get into 2.5 before October 31st, being about 10 lines long. That gives you the infrastructure to know what is going on. Similarly I don't think its infeasible to get the state interface into the base kernel just flipping flags in the device structure.
That makes it easy to add the needed pieces to base kernel code during the driver work after Oct 31st, but without having to import all the event logging stuff which wants hammering out over a longer period of time
- 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/
| |