From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF322C43381 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:54:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9723B218E2 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:54:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729752AbfB0IyJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2019 03:54:09 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:48070 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726031AbfB0IyI (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2019 03:54:08 -0500 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=vostro.local) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1gyuyc-0003cs-4C; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:54:06 +0100 From: John Ogness To: Petr Mladek Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Steven Rostedt , Sergey Senozhatsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk/console: Do not suppress information about dropped messages References: <20190226124945.7078-1-pmladek@suse.com> <87k1hmzfam.fsf@linutronix.de> <20190227083043.j6nw7t6nqulim6t7@pathway.suse.cz> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:54:04 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20190227083043.j6nw7t6nqulim6t7@pathway.suse.cz> (Petr Mladek's message of "Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:30:43 +0100") Message-ID: <878sy1fw7n.fsf@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019-02-27, Petr Mladek wrote: >> Imagine a situation where I am expecting a message to come, but don't >> see it because it was dropped. But if no more non-supressed messages >> come, I see neither the expected message nor the dropped message. > > Good point! There is a simple fix for this. We could print the warning > also when all messages are proceed and we are about to leave the > for-cycle. Yes! That is the piece that was missing! John Ogness