Messages in this thread | | | From | John Ogness <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH printk v4 7/8 v2] printk: use printk_buffers for devkmsg | Date | Sun, 08 Jan 2023 22:17:15 +0106 |
| |
On 2023-01-06, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote: >> - if (!prb_read_valid(prb, atomic64_read(&user->seq), r)) { >> + while (!printk_get_next_message(&pmsg, atomic64_read(&user->seq), true)) { > > A problem is that printk_get_next_message() does not format the > message when it shoud get supressed on the console.
Nice catch. I missed that.
> I would solve it be adding a parameter to printk_get_next_message() > that will tell whether to suppress or not, e.g. @can_suppress.
OK.
>> if (file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) { >> ret = -EAGAIN; >> goto out; >> @@ -814,36 +814,31 @@ static ssize_t devkmsg_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, >> * This pairs with __wake_up_klogd:A. >> */ >> ret = wait_event_interruptible(log_wait, >> - prb_read_valid(prb, >> - atomic64_read(&user->seq), r)); /* LMM(devkmsg_read:A) */ >> + prb_read_valid(prb, atomic64_read(&user->seq), >> + NULL)); /* LMM(devkmsg_read:A) */ > > The above change from "if" to "while" could be avoided if we use > printk_get_next_message() here as well. It looks slightly more > strightfoward to me.
Yes, that is better. A loop is overkill here.
John
| |