On Tue 2018-11-06 18:05:44, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (11/06/18 09:38), Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > If you would want to avoid buffering, you could set the number > > of buffers to zero. Then it would always fallback to > > the direct printk(). This comment was a hint for Peter and his workarounds. He ignores most of printk() code and writes messages directly to the serial console. > This printk-fallback makes me wonder if 'cont' really can ever go away. > We would totally break cont printk-s that trapped into printk-fallback; > as opposed to current sometimes-cont-works-just-fine. It could break things totally only when the new approach completely fails. I you have any doubts or suggestions then please comment on the patch adding the API. Best Regards, Petr
