Re: [RFC] New kernel-message logging API

On Saturday 22 September 2007 2:27:29 pm Vegard Nossum wrote:
After recent discussions on LKML and a general dissatisfaction at the
current printk() kernel-message logging interface, I've decided to
write down some of the ideas for a better system.


Requirements
============

* Backwards compatibility with printk(), syslog(), etc.

I.E. what we have now works just fine for what it does.

* Extensibility. Features like timestamping or file/line recording
[1] should be both selectable at compile-time and (if compiled in) at
run-time.

That doesn't require changing the API. Allowing the compiler to eliminate
messages below a threshold requires changing the API.


API
===

#define kprint(fmt, ...)

The main part of the kprint interface should be the kprint() function.

And then you propose not having a single kprint() function...

To support the different log-levels, there exists one kprint_*()
function for each log-level, for example kprint_info().

Why is this better than feeding the level in as an argument to the macro?

In order to print several related lines as one chunk, the emitter
should first allocate an object of the type struct kprint_buffer.

You know, I'm pretty happy with a first pass that doesn't address this issue
at all. Why bundle three unrelated problems into a single all-or-nothing
pass?

Rob
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/