Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759426Ab2EINaN (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 09:30:13 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:59939 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759186Ab2EINaI (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 09:30:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120509070710.GA29981@gmail.com> References: <1336004953.4240.9.camel@mop> <1336475689.1179.12.camel@mop> <20120509070710.GA29981@gmail.com> From: Kay Sievers Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:29:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/3] printk: convert byte-buffer to variable-length record buffer To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linus Torvalds , Jonathan Corbet , Sasha Levin , Greg Kroah-Hartmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 976 Lines: 24 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Thanks for bringing sanity into printk, Just to check all the options we have, and I have no good idea how they would work out. It's just an idea, without giving much thought about possible side effects: Can we somehow store the PID of the printk() thread that has left the un-terminated line behind in the buffer, and flush it out when the next printk() is from a differnt PID? That could prevent the mangling of "atomic" printk()s by continuation users, and merging unrelated continuation users together. Would it make sense to make the printk line buffer per CPU, so they are not shared between threads, and continuation could work more reliable? Kay -- 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/