Re: [PATCH] panic.c: export panic_on_oops

[Ingo Molnar]

* David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 14:09 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Also, would it be possible to just simplify the thing and not do any 
> > buffering at all? Extra buffering complexity in a console driver is only 
> > asking for trouble. Or is flash storage write cycles optimization that 
> > important in this case?
> 
> That and the fact that on NAND flash you have to write full pages at a 
> time -- that's 512 bytes, 2KiB or 4KiB depending on the type of chip. 
> So we really do want to buffer it where we can.
> 
> We don't want to write a 2KiB page for every line of printk output.

Then i think the buffering is at the wrong place: we should instead 
buffer in the generic layer and pass it to lowlevel if we know that we 
have gone past a 2K boundary.

The size of the generic log buffer is always a power of two so detecting 
2K boundaries is very easy. On any emergency the generic console layer 
will do faster flushes - this is nothing the console driver itself 
should bother with.

And that would avoid the whole workqueue logic - which is fragile to be 
done in a printk to begin with.

So what we need is an extension to struct console that sets a buffering 
limit. Zero (the default) means unbuffered.

(Btw., things like netconsole might make use of such buffering too.)

Agreed?

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