Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: printk: what is going on with additional newlines? | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Tue, 29 Aug 2017 19:31:36 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2017-08-30 at 11:25 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (08/29/17 18:52), Joe Perches wrote: > [..] > > > We could simply add a seq_buf_printk() that is implemented in the printk > > > proper, to parse the seq_buf buffer properly, and add the timestamps and > > > such. > > > > No need. printk would already add timestamps. > > the idea is not to do printk() on that seq buffer at all, but to > log_store(), atomically, seq buffer messages > > spin_lock(&logbuf_lock) > while (offset < seq_buffer->len) { > ... > log_store(seq->buffer + offset); > ... > } > spin_unlock(&logbuf_unlock)
Why?
What's wrong with a simple printk? It'd still do a log_store.
| |