From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751699AbdBBOeQ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 2 Feb 2017 09:34:16 -0500
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:45124 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751372AbdBBOeO (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 2 Feb 2017 09:34:14 -0500
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 09:34:09 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 5/8] printk: report lost messages in printk safe/nmi
 contexts
Message-ID: <20170202093409.3d7f617e@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20170202020257.GB1954@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20161227141611.940-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
        <20161227141611.940-6-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
        <20170201113700.5b464143@gandalf.local.home>
        <20170202020257.GB1954@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:02:57 +0900
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> wrote:

> On (02/01/17 11:37), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > This looks fine, but I'm curious if you tested it. That is, added a
> > bunch of printks to overflow the buffer. IIRC, I did it to the original
> > nmi code. If you haven't you may want to just to make sure it works. I
> > can also test it too if I get some time.  
> 
> Hello Steven,
> 
> yes, I have tested it on my x86 box.
> 

Please note how you tested it in your change log. It's not really a
requirement, and you don't really have to do it. But it helps people
have warm fuzzies about the code. I'm trying to do this in the future
in my own work too.

-- Steve