Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Apr 2002 08:41:35 -0400 (EDT) | From | Mark Hahn <> | Subject | Re: Event logging vs enhancing printk |
| |
> Can you make sure with printk-s that no error log is lost, can > you tell when a log has actually reached a permanent store device ?
I see no reason to believe that evlog would behave any differently from printk in this regard.
> Can you pass lots of data through a printk ?
yes, of course you can, and it's just as stupid as passing a lot of data through evlog.
> Can you make sure that printks are not intermixed ?
show why this is a serious problem.
> I was glad to find this error log feature that meets our requirements. > It provides us services which reduce our development cost and provides > us functionality at "usual industrial level" (see e.g. POSIX).
frankly, evlog is a solution in search of a problem. I see no reason printk can't do TSC timestamping, more robust and/or efficient buffering, auto-classification in klogd, realtime filtering/notification in userspace, even delaying of formatting, and logging of binary data.
regards, mark hahn.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |