> I think you are missing the point. printk can be called even before
> kmalloc is usable and you cannot tell if kmalloc can be called yet.
> Yes, it is unlikely but crashing during debugging just complicates
> things. Far better to just count and report dropped messages and never
> call any other kernel functions from printk. It also keeps a critical
> kernel function nice and simple.
Wait, back up, let me get this straight. There are two situations here:
1. Recursive printk occurs before kmalloc is initialized:
You claim that a panic is WORSE for debugging that an undetected deadlock
is? How does that assist with debugging???
2. Recursive printk occurs after kmalloc is initialized:
You claim that merely counting the failed messages is better than doing
_THE_RIGHT_THING_ is every case except OOM (which would be treated quite
similarly to what you are describing....
Please clear up these issues... because I believe I understand what you
are implying, just doing understand your reasonings...
-Chris
btw, if nothing else, why not just print out the format str on OOM? That
way you don't even need a buffer...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 21:00:10 EST