Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:11:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:10:51 -0500 Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157]:53204 "EHLO zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:10:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3C113F33.B310CB10@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:14:11 -0500 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: "Christopher Friesen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.16 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: davidm@hpl.hp.com Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Andrew Morton , j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4.16 kernel/printk.c (per processorinitializationcheck) In-Reply-To: <3C103A1E.2524A7B7@zip.com.au> <15377.13976.342104.636304@napali.hpl.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Orig: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Mosberger wrote: > > >>>>> On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:52:07 -0200 (BRST), Marcelo Tosatti said: > > Marcelo> I'm really not willing to apply this kludge... > > Do you agree that it should always be safe to call printk() from C code? Is it really safe to call this from interrupt handlers? I can think of cases where the time required to print can totally mess stuff up... Chris -- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/