On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 19:33 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 4:52 PM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 15:46 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > This is why I think any discussion that says "people should buffer > > > their lines themselves and we should get rid if pr_cont()" is > > > fundamentally broken. > > > > > > Don't go down that hole. I won't take it. It's wrong. > > > > I don't think it's wrong per se. > > It's *absolutely* and 100% wrong. > > Yes, any random *user* of pr_cont() can decide to buffer on it's own. Which I believe is the point of the discussion, not the complete removal of KERN_CONT. > But when the discussion is about printk() - the implementation, not > the users - then it's complete and utter BS to talk about trying to > get rid of pr_cont(). > > See the difference? Sure, but I fail to see where anyone said get rid of pr_cont in this thread. It seems all that was discussed was just various schemes to improve coalescing output. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
