RE: [patch] printk subsystems

[Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky]

> From: H. Peter Anvin [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 
> Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
> >
> > Hey! Come on! You don't think I am that lame, do you? Man what
> > a fame I do have!
> >
> > Before the device vaporizes, it recalls the message, so there is
> > no message to read - the same way you take away the sysfs data from
> > the sysfs tree ...
> 
> If you think that will happen with printk(), then, quite frankly, you're
> seriously deluded.

I am kind of deluded, that's for sure. And sore too, but that's another one.

I tend to agree with you; however, it can be done. You would need to adapt
a circular buffer to work with kue. Not a big deal though - just an space 
allocator (that would recall the oldest messages if in need of space) and
the 
'destructor' would just clear the space.

If I get to modify the code to make the destructor thing work (any of these
days), then it will be possible to do it without modifying kue at all.

Now that I think about it, it would work - but I don't think it'd be
really worth it (the per-message overhead would be big for printk,
I'd say). For the record, I really think relayfs could be a better
answer [with the limited reading that so far I had about it].

Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own
(and my fault)