From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Petr Mladek' <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/5] printk: implement pr_cont_t
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:38:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0f3e3efffad64739a223273cc7c738bc@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200825131041.GV4353@alley>
From: Petr Mladek
> Sent: 25 August 2020 14:11
>
> On Thu 2020-08-20 12:33:23, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Petr Mladek
> > > Sent: 20 August 2020 11:16
> > ...
> > > Now that I think about it. This is the biggest problem with any temporary buffer
> > > for pr_cont() lines. I am more and more convinced that we should just
> > > _keep the current behavior_. It is not ideal. But sometimes mixed
> > > messages are always better than lost ones.
> >
> > Maybe a marker to say 'more expected' might be useful.
> > OTOH lack of a trailing '\n' probably signifies that a
> > pr_cont() is likely to be next.
>
> The problem is the "probably". Lack of trailing '\n' might also mean
> that the author did not care. Note that newline is not strictly
> required at the moment. The next message is concatenated only when
> pr_cont() is used from the same process.
Thinks.... (smoke comes out of ears...):
If the 'trace entry' contained the pid and whether it was a pr_cont
then the trace reader could merge continuation lines even if
there was a small number of interleaved other traces.
So anything reading continuously might break a continuation
(as might happen if there is a trace from an ISR).
But the output from dmesg and /var/log/messages will
almost always be correct.
This moves all the complexity away from the trace writing code.
> I would personally hate printk when I debugged some hard-to-reproduce
> bug, finally succeeded, and some message was missing just because
> of a missing newline.
My annoyance is that I want printk() to come out on the console
(like it used to 30 years ago).
I don't want the console output to be from a syslogd process.
On SYSV killing syslogd (mostly) did the trick.
x86 is annoying because you need to have setup a serial console
(or have a high speed camera pointing at the vga monitor).
> > Unexpected pr_cont() could be output with a leading "... "
> > to help indicate the message is a continuation.
>
> Interesting idea. It might help to catch broken code. Well, I am still
> not sure that people would appreciate this printk() behavior.
I was thinking of just catching the case where pr_cont()
data can't be appended to the earlier line.
For direct tty output this would happen if an intervening
printk() had to add an extra '\n' to terminate the partial line.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-25 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-19 23:26 [RFC PATCH 0/5] printk: new log_cont implementation John Ogness
2020-08-19 23:26 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] printk: implement pr_cont_t John Ogness
2020-08-20 0:33 ` Joe Perches
2020-08-20 7:44 ` David Laight
2020-08-20 7:59 ` Joe Perches
2020-08-20 8:49 ` David Laight
2020-08-20 9:18 ` John Ogness
2020-08-20 16:03 ` Joe Perches
2020-08-20 10:16 ` Petr Mladek
2020-08-20 12:33 ` David Laight
2020-08-25 13:10 ` Petr Mladek
2020-08-25 13:38 ` David Laight [this message]
2020-08-25 15:32 ` Petr Mladek
2020-08-24 2:08 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-08-24 5:37 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2020-08-19 23:26 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] sysrq: use pr_cont_t for cont messages John Ogness
2020-08-20 1:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-08-20 17:48 ` Joe Perches
2020-08-20 17:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-08-20 22:11 ` John Ogness
2020-08-20 22:36 ` Joe Perches
2020-08-19 23:26 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] workqueue: " John Ogness
2020-08-19 23:26 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] locking/selftest: " John Ogness
2020-08-19 23:26 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] lockdep: " John Ogness
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0f3e3efffad64739a223273cc7c738bc@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome