Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:13:18 -0700 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] printk: Add printk_flush() to force buffered text to console |
| |
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 02:04:30PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:22:33PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > I actually would like to make these more compact. As all my test box > > > > consoles go through serial ports, just booting through this takes more > > > > time the the compile itself. > > > > > > The tests took 23 seconds boot time on one kernel: > > > > > > [ 0.152934] Testing tracer nop: PASSED > > > ...1577 lines total... > > > [ 23.206550] Testing kprobe tracing: OK > > > > > > And 135 seconds in another bloated kernel: > > > > > > [ 115.396441] Testing event 9p_client_req: OK > > > ...2545 lines total... > > > [ 240.268783] Testing kprobe tracing: OK > > > > > > I'd appreciate if the boot time can be reduced. Because I'm doing > > > kernel boot tests for *every single* commits. > > > > > > It may look insane amount of work, but it's still manageable: with 10 > > > kvm instances each take 1 minute to boot test a kernel, I can boot > > > test 60*24*10=14400 kernels in one day. That's a rather big number. > > > That allows me to run more cpu/vm/io stress tests for each kernel :-) > > > > Do you really want to enable those tests for your test > > kernels? Can they fail if we mess up other parts of the > > kernel, or do they only test the tracing portions? > > These printk's are useful, are used for a specific (albeit > limited) purpose and were and continue to be useful in that > role. > > The changes Steve bisected to broke this use of printk().
And note, fixed others :)
> Please apply Steve's fix, fix it yourself or revert the changes that > regressed printk().
I thought Steve's patch was just a RFC thing, is it really something that everyone wants to see applied?
thanks,
greg k-h
| |