> I'm not aware of that being the case. The output string
> is formed into a static buffer and then copied into the
> printk ring buffer all under spinlock_irqsave(logbuf_lock).
>
> If there is something wrong then it would be occurring
> at the other end - where data is taken out of the ring
> and is sent to the console device(s). The locking there
> is OK, I think?
I think we're talking about slightly different things. I'd agree that
one call to printk is atomic, and won't get interspersed with other
things, but if we output a line via multiple calls to printk, then I
think we have a problem. Say CPU 0 executes this bit of code:
for (i=0; i<10; i++) { printk ("%d ", i); } printk("\n");
and CPU 1 does "printk("hello\n");" then instead of getting either
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
hello
or
hello
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
either of which would be fine, we may get
0 1 2 3 hello
4 5 6 7 8 9
which I don't think is fine - obviously the example is somewhat
trite, but with the real instances of things that build output for one
line through multiple calls to printk, you can get unreadable garbage,
if I read the code correctly ?
M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:11 EST