On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 11:21:58PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >>
> >> What's wrong with klogd -c 8 or equivalent?
> >
> >Setting the loglevel higher, will not make pr_debug() calls visible. The only
> >way to make them visible right now, is by re-compiling the kernel.
>
> pr_debug() was IMHO
On Feb 8 2008 10:52, Jason Baron wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:42:14PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 16:03 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>> > make the pr_debug() function dependent upon the new immediate
>> > infrastruture.
>>
>> What's wrong with klogd -c 8 or equivalent?
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:42:14PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 16:03 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> > make the pr_debug() function dependent upon the new immediate infrastruture.
>
> What's wrong with klogd -c 8 or equivalent?
>
>
Setting the loglevel higher, will not make pr
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 16:03 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> make the pr_debug() function dependent upon the new immediate infrastruture.
What's wrong with klogd -c 8 or equivalent?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED
hi,
make the pr_debug() function dependent upon the new immediate infrastruture.
Thus, b/c of the low runtime impact, we can dynamically enable/disable
pr_debug withoug recompiling. Patch allows 'pr_debug=0/1' on the command
line or via /proc/sys/debug/pr_debug.
thanks,
-Jason
--
To unsubscrib
5 matches
Mail list logo