Re: [PATCH] Re: kernel/printk.c: increasing the buffer size to capture

[Thomas Dodd]

Robert Read wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 01:37:16PM -0600, Thomas Dodd wrote:
> > Robert Read wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:30:08AM +0900, Ishikawa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone tried 128K buffer size in kernel/printk.c
> > > > and still have the kernel boot (without
> > > > hard to notice memory corruption problems  and other subtle bugs)?
> > > > Any hints and tips will be appreciated.
> > >
> > > I have used 128k and larger buffer sizes, and I just noticed this
> > > fragment in the RedHat Tux Webserver patch.  It creates a 2MB buffer:
> >
> > I think this should be a config option.
> 
> Ok, here is a simple patch to add a config option, I'm compiling it
> now, so it's not tested yet.  One question: what is the best way to
> force this option to be a power of 2?

Why not just make the config option in Kbytes.
and do:

#define LOG_BUF_LEN (CONFIG_PRINTK_BUF_LEN * 1024)

since the config option has a default option and will
always be defined, is the #ifdef check really needed?

	-Thomas