Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2019 15:59:44 +0100 | From | Petr Mladek <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 3/3] sysrq: Warn about insufficient console_loglevel |
| |
On Mon 2019-01-14 17:05:22, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (01/11/19 17:20), Petr Mladek wrote: > > +static void warn_console(bool console_suppressed, > > + int orig_log_level, > > + struct sysrq_key_op *op_p) > > +{ > > + static int warned; > > + > > + if (warned) > > + return; > > + > > + /* Do not warn when people are already setting loglevel via sysrq */ > > + if (op_p->enable_mask & SYSRQ_ENABLE_LOG) { > > + warned = 1; > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + if (console_suppressed) { > > + pr_info("Messages filtered by console_loglevel (%d)%s\n", > > + orig_log_level, > > + sysrq_on_mask(SYSRQ_ENABLE_LOG) ? ", try SysRq+7" : ""); > > + warned = 1; > > + } > > +} > > I understand the intent. > > Some comments: > > - Not all of sysrq handlers printk() data. There are some quiet > handlers. E.g. sysrq_handle_unraw(). Having "Messages filtered by > console_loglevel" can be confusing. > > - Not all sysrq handlers use INFO level. > E.g. sync_inodes_sb()->WARN_ON()->pr_warn(). So once again there can > be a "false positive" "Messages filtered" error, while in fact > no messages would be filtered out. > > What do you think?
Yes, it has false positives. On the other hand, I do not think that a better message is worth even more complicated code.
Either we find a better text, for example, use warning style:
pr_warn("warning: messages are filtered by console loglevel (%d)%s\n"
or hint style:
pr_info("hint: make sure to see all messages by increasing the console logvel, ...
or ???
Otherwise, I would just throw away this idea.
Best Regards, Petr
| |