Hey Petr,
Petr Mladek writes:
This produces something like:
3Warning: unable to open an initial console.
3Failed to execute %s (error %d)
6Kernel memory protection disabled.
3Starting init: %s exists but couldn't execute it (error %d)
6Run %s as init process
7initcall %pS returned %d after %lld usecs
7calling %pS @ %i
2initrd overwritten (0x%08lx < 0x%08lx) - disabling it.
The loglevel is not well separated. It is neither human readable
nor safe for a machine processing . It works only for single digit.
[...]
It looks in less like: [...]
Hmm, why is it important that debugfs output is human readable? My impression
was that it's fine to have machine-readable stuff there.
Re: not being not safe for machine processing because it only works for a
single digit, I'm a little confused. KERN_* levels are, as far as I know, only
a single byte wide, and we rely on that already (eg. in printk_skip_header()).
We also already have precedent for null-separation/control characters in (for
example) /proc/pid/cmdline.
What am I missing? :-)
Well, it still might be non-trivial to find the string in the code
and see what exactly has changed. It might be pretty useful
to mention even the source_file:line, for example:
<3> init/main.c:1489: Warning: unable to open an initial console.\n
<3> init/main.c:1446: Failed to execute %s (error %d)\n
<6> init/main.c:1398: Kernel memory protection disabled.\n
<3> init/main.c:1366: Starting init: %s exists but couldn't execute it (error
%d)\n
Almost certainly a theoretical concern, but I am not a big fan of this format,
because it relies on a character (":") which is legal in paths (although as
you'd expect, we don't have any cases in the kernel right now). That's one of
the reasons why I preferred to use nulls, which can't be in a filename.
