From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: andi@firstfloor.org (Andi Kleen)
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 10:54:27 -0700
Subject: [PATCH v3] printk: add option to print cpu id
In-Reply-To: <1344013004-32211-1-git-send-email-vikram.pandita@ti.com> (Vikram
 Pandita's message of "Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:56:44 -0700")
References: <1344013004-32211-1-git-send-email-vikram.pandita@ti.com>
Message-ID: <m2628z6euk.fsf@firstfloor.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Vikram Pandita <vikram.pandita@ti.com> writes:

> From: Vikram Pandita <vikram.pandita@ti.com>
>
> Introduce config option to enable CPU id reporting for printk() calls.

What's wrong with using trace_printk for this? That's much faster
anyways. Generally printk is so slow that it's typically useless for
instrumenting races.

And really: Wasting 1/3 of the 80 character line is too much.

-Andi

-- 
ak at linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only