Re: [PATCH] printk: drop ambiguous LOG_CONT flag

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 21:54 +0200, "Jan H. Schönherr" wrote:
> Am 08.10.2012 21:24, schrieb Kay Sievers:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Kay Sievers <kay@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:49 PM, "Jan H. Schönherr"
> >>> Given that I'm able to fix the racing case, would you be in favor of
> >>> this approach, or should we stick to the earlier version?
> >>
> >> I'm open to everything that makes sense. Let's see how it looks and we
> >> can decide when we have something that passes the tests.
[]
> > any updates, did you try something else?
> > Or should we merge the first version for now?
[]
> My current version does mostly well for race-printk()s, now. But
> there's still one issue to resolve and some polishing to do.
> 
> If we can afford to wait a little longer, we might get a nicer
> solution (and avoid a possible mostly-revert later).

I've also got a large refactoring patch series to printk.c
(move and declutter) I was going to submit post rc-1.

No doubt there'll be several conflicts there too.


--
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/