Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755529Ab0K3SAw (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:00:52 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:36320 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755043Ab0K3SAu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:00:50 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,281,1288594800"; d="scan'208";a="355086566" From: "Luck, Tony" To: Andrew Morton , "Huang, Ying" CC: Len Brown , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andi Kleen , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:00:47 -0800 Subject: RE: [PATCH -v2 2/3] ACPI, APEI, Add APEI generic error status print support Thread-Topic: [PATCH -v2 2/3] ACPI, APEI, Add APEI generic error status print support Thread-Index: AcuQO1TWaGXJqlS/R26i7YDiOKoC1AAfGwGQ Message-ID: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D530191E8BCF1@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1291085501-31494-1-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> <1291085501-31494-3-git-send-email-ying.huang@intel.com> <20101129190343.7d7cea12.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20101129190343.7d7cea12.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1067 Lines: 32 > + for (i = 0; i < strs_size; i++) { > + if (!(bits & (1U << i))) > + continue; > + str = strs[i]; > + if (len && len + strlen(str) + 2 > 80) { > + printk("\n"); > + len = 0; > + } > + if (!len) > + len = pr_pfx(pfx, "%s", str); > + else > + len += printk(", %s", str); > + } > + if (len) > + printk("\n"); Does printk() offer any guarantees about getting all the characters from a single printk() call out to the console without interleaving with messages from printk() calls on other cpus? If it does, then it would be a good idea to sprintf() the parts of this message to a buffer and then use one printk() call. I think I read that netconsole ends up with one packet on the wire for each call to printk(). Trying to parse output jumbled together from multiple cpus doesn't sound like fun. -Tony -- 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/