On Tue 2018-12-11 19:26:48, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >From bdb80508390694456f3f864f9651d047ded109bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> > Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 19:23:30 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH v4] printk: Add caller information to printk() output. > > Sometimes we want to print a series of printk() messages to consoles > without being disturbed by concurrent printk() from interrupts and/or > other threads. But we can't enforce printk() callers to use their local > buffers because we need to ask them to make too much changes. Also, even > buffering up to one line inside printk() might cause failing to emit > an important clue under critical situation. > > Therefore, instead of trying to help buffering, let's try to help > reconstructing messages by saving caller information as of calling > log_store() and adding it as "[T$thread_id]" or "[C$processor_id]" > upon printing to consoles. > > Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
The patch looks fine to me: Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> Sergey, would you mind to ack this patch as well? >From my point of view, the patch is ready to go into linux-next. Well, I would prefer to keep it there one more release cycle. There is no rush. The patch is primary for 0-day robot. We are very close to the next merge window that will be problematic because of the holidays. Best Regards, Petr
