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

Andrew Morton
2009-04-29T06:23:31Z

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 ;)