On 31 March 2014 14:34, Andreas Schwab <sch...@suse.de> wrote: > One Thousand Gnomes <gno...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes: > >> It's however implemented and present. The rest is between you and the >> relevant Kconfig maintainer. I'm sure you count as an expert ;-) > > Indeed. > > http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-kernel/2014-03/msg00071.html
I have just completed an implementation of a tty driver for netconsole, which I was about to submit as a patch. When the kernel command line is set accordingly (console=netcon0), it has the desired effect of taking over output to /dev/console when it is loaded. Would you say this work is wasted, or that it's worth submitting the patch anyway? There are differences to the ttyprintk approach. ttyprintk is currently kernel-only, and not available as a module. ttyprintk adds special formatting to the output, which netconsole does not. (If netconsole were to provide special formatting, it might make sense for it to be syslog-compatible). In defence of netconsole providing a tty driver, many other output device modules already provide their own tty (i.e. do not rely on ttyprintk). Also, unlike ttyprintk, netconsole is already widely used and well documented on the web. Adding a tty driver to netconsole would be a natural extension of functionality for those already using it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/