Re: [PATCH v2] early_printk: consolidate random copies of identical code

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Thu, 7 Mar 2013, Andrew Morton wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 22:25:48 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/printk.c b/kernel/printk.c
> > > index 7664e49..86799bf 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/printk.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/printk.c
> > > @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ struct console_cmdline
> > >  static struct console_cmdline console_cmdline[MAX_CMDLINECONSOLES];
> > >  static int selected_console = -1;
> > >  static int preferred_console = -1;
> > > +struct console *early_console;
> > >  int console_set_on_cmdline;
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(console_set_on_cmdline);
> > >  
> > > @@ -1718,7 +1719,6 @@ static size_t cont_print_text(char *text, size_t size) { return 0; }
> > >  #endif /* CONFIG_PRINTK */
> > >  
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK
> > > -struct console *early_console;
> > >  
> > >  void early_vprintk(const char *fmt, va_list ap)
> > >  {
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Then you don't have to spray any of those ifdefs into the sparc code.
> > 
> > Yeah, that's what I thought as well. The extra pointer is not going to
> > create massive bloat :)
> 
> It's a bit hacky though.  If CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK=n then that code just
> shouldn't exist.  If we let it persist then maybe it's doing other
> wrong stuff as well.

Agreed.

Looking again it turns out that sparc does not fall into the early
console category. While it uses the early_printk naming convention it
does not use the early_vprintk stuff which I consolidated out of the
other architectures. So the sparc part of the patch simply wants to be
reverted.
 
Thanks,

	tglx