Message-ID: <3CB4606F.87A4460A@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:55:27 -0700
From: Larry Kessler <kessler@us.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Event logging vs enhancing printk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

Michael Holzheu wrote...
> I think it would be important to have both options:
> feed printk messages into posix event logging (this does
> the current patch as far as I know) 

The current patch forks the message to evlog inside the printk
function.  This thread is proposing that the printk function be
wrapped inside a macro so you could easily capture 
file/funcname/lineno of the calling function along with the
original printk message
(plus the other stuff stored in the evlog record header).
 
> AND feed events
> which are written with the new posix event APIs into the
> traditional syslogd logging.

This would be done in user-space, not in the kernel.  This is on
our enhancements list for event logging.
-
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/