Re: Event logging vs enhancing printk

From: Denis Vlasenko (vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua)
Date: Wed Apr 10 2002 - 06:24:02 EST


On 9 April 2002 18:49, Brian Beattie wrote:
> I would prefer to see effort expended on fixing printk/klogd...off the
> top of my head:
>
> - make printk a macro that prepends file/function/line to the message.
> - fix printk calls: messages with consistent format, calls in the right
> places, with the "correct" information.
> - postprocessing tools for analysing the logs.
>
> I would say that this is probably less work than implementing evlog,
> much less work to maintain, and provide generally better performance.

Sounds ok for me.

It will be difficult to push it into mainline kernel.
I tried to fix loglevels in some printks. Patches were _trivial_
but nevertheless they weren't taken.

--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:14 EST