On 20.06.2009 02:39, ron minnich wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote >> do_printk is defined in src/arch/i386/lib/printk_init.c as almost >> identical function, but without console_tx_flush and without locking. If >> only one CPU uses the lockless variant, we lose. >> > > it's very useful. It can be used in the rom/CAR code before consoles > really work. >
Hm. AFAICS both versions have the same console requirements and just differ in locking (if you ignore the _flush no-op). > This kind of thing is common. Just about all OSes have a "printk > before printk" function. > True, but our console requirements for both versions are pretty minimal and I think we showed in v3 that a one-size-fits-all printk can work fine. > So be careful. I use this one already in qemu. > Since the spinlock seems to live outside the CAR area, locking will break for any processor not having working RAM access. The solution is v3-style global variables as outlined in my other mail. >>> (we should just rename this to printk and use it the v3 way instead of >>> the printk_<loglevel> layers on top, but that's orthogonal, too) >>> >> Yes please! >> > > one thing at a time. That is on a list, but let's focus on this thread. > Agreed. Besides that, such a conversion would allow me to use Coccinelle again, so I'll probably try to do that myself once I have time. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
