Re: [PATCH 00/50] Add log level to show_stack()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On (19/11/08 14:04), Petr Mladek wrote:
> I agree that it is complicated to pass the loglevel as
> a parameter. It would be better define the default
> log level for a given code section. It might be stored
> in task_struct for the normal context and in per-CPU
> variables for interrupt contexts.

I do recall that we talked about per-CPU printk state bit which would
start/end "just print it" section. We probably can extend it to "just
log_store" type of functionality. Doesn't look like a very bad idea.
"This task/context is in trouble, whatever it printk()-s is important".

Per-console loglevel also might help sometimes. Slower consoles would
->write() only critical messages, faster consoles everything.

Passing log_level as part of message payload, which printk machinery
magically hides is not entirely exciting. What we have in the code
now - printk("%s blah\n", lvl) - is not what we see in the logs.
Because the leading '%s' becomes special. And printk()/sprintf()
documentation should reflect that: '%s' prints a string, but sometimes
it doesn't.


linux-snps-arc mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux