Re: [RFC][patch] console_flush()

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk>]

On 31 Mar 2006, at 20:24, Jimi Xenidis wrote:

> It occurs to me that since console_sync_start/stop use ++ and -- 
> respectively, that it was designed to be "nested" and bracket code 
> segments.  If this is indeed desirable than perhaps we need another 
> interface that simply flushed the console.
> The only real use I can see for it is to flush after the panic message 
> rather than using console_sync_start() before it.

It's designed to be nestable, but it doesn't have to be used that way. 
The only argument for a new interface function is if we thought its 
name and use were significantly less confusing or weird, which I don't 
think is the case here. I also like the current strategy of switching 
to synchronous console mode *before* writing the critical info you care 
about, rather than flushing it after, although I suppose it doesn't 
really matter much either way.

  -- Keir