RE: [PATCH v2] printk: add option to print cpu id

[Venu Byravarasu]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-kernel-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-kernel-
> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Vikram Pandita
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 2:46 PM
> To: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kay@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Vikram Pandita; Mike Turquette; Vimarsh
> Zutshi
> Subject: [PATCH v2] printk: add option to print cpu id
> 
> From: Vikram Pandita <vikram.pandita@xxxxxx>
> 
> Introduce config option to enable CPU id reporting for printk() calls.
> 
> Example logs with this option enabled look like:
>  [1] [    2.328613] usbcore: registered new interface driver libusual
>  [1] [    2.335418] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbtest
>  [1] [    2.342803] mousedev: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
>  [0] [    2.352600] twl_rtc twl_rtc: Power up reset detected.
>  [0] [    2.359191] twl_rtc twl_rtc: Enabling TWL-RTC
>  [1] [    2.367797] twl_rtc twl_rtc: rtc core: registered twl_rtc as rtc0
>  [1] [    2.375274] i2c /dev entries driver
>  [1] [    2.382324] Driver for 1-wire Dallas network protocol.
> 
> Its sometimes very useful to have printk also print the CPU Identifier
> that executed the call. This has helped to debug various SMP issues on
> shipping
> products.

Is it not better to have macros which will have wrapper to printk with required
debug info added? E.g. cpu# in your case.
If by default we add cupid, is it not over head in each message getting
printed with printk?

> 
> Known limitation is if the system gets preempted between function call and
> actual printk, the reported cpu-id might not be accurate. But most of the
> times its seen to give a good feel of how the N cpu's in the system are
> getting loaded.
> 
--
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/