Re: [PATCH] printk(): add KERN_CONT where needed

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:00:10 +0200
Kay Sievers <kay@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Maybe it'd be better to aggregate content rather like
> > printk does. __Aggregate until you get a newline or a
> > new KERN_<LEVEL>
> 
> The continuation printk() can can always go wrong when multiple
> threads do that in parallel. We can try to make it better with a
> per-cpu buffer, but I guess there will always be a situation where
> this can happen.

Maybe we can be a bit smarter.  For example, if `current' is unchanged
and __builtin_return_address(0) is unchanged, keep on buffering.

It's all a bit hacky, but weeding out all those thousands of printks
which never get printed anyway doesn't sound much fun either.

> -	printk(")");
> +	printk(KERN_CONT ")");

And I do think we should avoid doing it that way, if only because it
consumes 10 display columns and makes a mess.  Maybe use pr_cont()? 
But that implies that the affected code is using the pr_foo()
facilities, and a lot of it doesn't.  So maybe a new macro.

All a bit of a pain.
--
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/