On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Only when things are bad. Im not arguing about that point just your cycle
> counts. The other concern is that its better for printk to get a message
> out than hang in a lock
I agree completely. The point of my patch was that by adding a few (or
100s, not terribly important) cycles to the printk code path we can make
it MUCH more likely for printk's to come out... making printk (which I see
as a debugging tool) robust is a very important thing to do.
Does this make sense, or am I off picking daisies and talking to
myself? :)
-Chris
-
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 - 21:00:13 EST