On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:08:44 +0206 John Ogness <john.ogn...@linutronix.de> wrote:
> For me a trace event represents a specific point in the kernel code. But > this new printk trace event, instead, represents general log > redirection. I do not oppose it, but it feels like a hack to me. In > contrast, simply setting a dynamic printk flag to write the message > string to the trace buffer (without also activating some pseudo trace > event) feels more natural. I agree with your sentiment. But my experience with the kernel is, if you create an API for one subsystem, other subsystems are destined to (ab)use it. Now, trace_array_vprintk() is available too, which acts just like trace_printk(), but requires creating a separate trace buffer to write to. I'm fine with this because it wont cause noise in the top level buffer. > > Just sharing my thoughts, as requested. Appreciated ;-) -- Steve