Re: [PATCH 5/5] ring-buffer: fix printk output

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:09:55 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 07:43:59 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:48:19 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > -	printk_once(KERN_WARNING "Tracing recursion: depth[%d]:"
> > > > > +	printk_once(KERN_WARNING "Tracing recursion: depth[%ld]:"
> > > > 
> > > > hrmph.  I didn't know that printk_once() existed, and I should 
> > > > have known.  I wonder how many other people don't know.
> > > 
> > > Was posted to linux-next@vger.kernel.org.
> > 
> > Well no wonder I didn't know about it.
> 
> I (too?) think it's counter-productive that the linux-next list is 
> split out of lkml. I constantly fall into that trap: i get a 
> bugreport against one of our trees, i see that there's vger in the 
> Cc: list and mistake it for being Cc:-ed to lkml (all our trees are 
> developed on lkml and most of the bugreports come Cc:-ed to lkml) 
> but in reality it's Cc:-ed to linux-next which has a much smaller 
> audience. (which audience apparently does not even include you)
> 
> If this email list fragmentation and the resoluting loss of 
> information bothers you too then please ask Stephen to move 
> linux-next mails to lkml (i've Cc:-ed Stephen) - it's not like it's 
> actually something separate ... today's linux-next messages are 
> tomorrow's lkml messages. Moving linux-next mails to lkml would 
> nicely improve the S/N ratio on lkml.
> 

eh.  Just auto-add lkml to tipbot-commit emails?

printk_once() is racy on smp and preempt btw ;)