On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:33 AM, "Jan H. Schönherr" <schn...@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote: > Am 26.09.2012 23:15, schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:58:45PM +0200, Jan H. Schönherr wrote: >>> Against v3.6-rc7, only lightly tested. >> >> Well, against linux-next and highly tested would be best. It's a bit >> late to get this into linux-next for 3.7, how important is it really? > > There are no conflicting commits in linux-next, so it should apply there > as well. > > "Tested" as in: it fixes my use case: multiple printk()s shortly after each > other -- with KERN_prefix but without a newline at the end. Those were > sometimes concatenated since that printk-rewrite.
Please provide the output of /dev/kmsg so we can see what's going on here. > All other printk()s that I come across more often look as usual, before and > after the patch. (Mostly singular printk()s, but I also checked the output > from the oom-killer.) > > There is no need to include this hastily -- at least not from my point of view > -- as it is already broken in 3.5 and nobody else seems to notice it > (... and I have now a fix for my development printk()s). Should I resend the > patch later? > > I was also hoping that Kay might share his opinion, as the LOG_CONT > flag is rather young, and he might have some different plans for it. It is a flag that we have not been able to merge a continuation line in the buffer, because we had a race with another thread, or the console lock was taken for a long time and we couldn't use the merge buffer. LOG_CONT is used to merge (not intended to be) separate records at time we read them from the record buffer, and print them, it is also exported as a flag in /dev/kmsg. I don't think we can just remove it, we can not get that information from the prefix+newlines, they are not sufficient. Thanks, Kay -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
