Re: [PATCH] printk: robustify printk

From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Mon Aug 11 2008 - 10:55:55 EST



On Mon, 11 Aug 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:

> $INSERT-ANY-OTHER-PRINTK-USE$
>
> The point was that printk may have been perfectly adequate for
> them with its existing buffer sizes and dynamic wake up frequency,
> and might not anymore with the timer wakeup change. Essentially
> it is making a widely used kernel facility more fragile.

I've measured several latencies in the kernel that would cause klogd to
take serveral jiffies to wake up. I highly doubt that adding one jiffy
will break anything. And if it did, then it would show a bug in their
system. If adding one jiffy causes lost data, then the system
administrators are relying on a utility (klogd) that can easily fail them
without these patches.


If we are making a highly fragile setup a bit more fragile, maybe it will
wake the IT guys up to change their setup.

-- Steve

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/