[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: RFC - printk handling more than one CON_BOOT
    On Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:14, Ingo Molnar pondered:
    > > > Why not have a state variable that tells us whether we are in
    > > > the early boot phase or not and warn about early consoles that
    > > > get registered too late and real consoles that get registered
    > > > too early?
    > >
    > > That makes sense to me. Today - there are some bootconsoles (x86
    > > and sh) that accept a "keep" - still register early - but don't
    > > set the CON_BOOT, so they get treated like a normal console (but
    > > are hooked up before console_init()).
    > >
    > > This would not allow that to happen.... - is that really desired?
    > Hm, i actually rely on 'earlyprintk=...,keep' myself sometimes.
    > I should really have noticed that ;-)
    > 'keep' is really useful for some of the nastiest of crashes: where
    > we crash so hard and so fast that regular printk has no chance/time
    > to print something useful. On more than one occasion i got the
    > un-fancy early-printk stuff give me a vital clue before the kernel
    > crapped up - while normal printk wouldnt.
    > So you are right - we need an iteration over early consoles and
    > shuffle the keep-ones into the real console list, right?

    My limited understanding is that the only difference between a "standard"
    console, and a bootconsole is the flag CON_BOOT.

    boot consoles get added as normal (in register_console()), then removed from
    the console list (in unregister_console()) already - don't they?

    The other thing I forgot to do was update disable_boot_consoles() - that is
    fixed now too.


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-07-01 02:29    [W:0.023 / U:44.236 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site