Petr,
On Thu, Aug 20 2020 at 12:43, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2020-08-20 12:30:55, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Good. So I suggest that I apply that on top of rc1 somewhere in tip and
>> tag the top commit. So you can pull that tag into your printk branch and
>> go wild.
>
> Sounds good to me.
On Thu 2020-08-20 12:30:55, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Petr,
>
> On Thu, Aug 20 2020 at 10:47, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The interface is perfectly fine for printk() needs.
>
> Good. So I suggest that I apply that on top of rc1 somewhere in tip and
> tag the top commit. So you can pull that tag into y
Petr,
On Thu, Aug 20 2020 at 10:47, Petr Mladek wrote:
> The interface is perfectly fine for printk() needs.
Good. So I suggest that I apply that on top of rc1 somewhere in tip and
tag the top commit. So you can pull that tag into your printk branch and
go wild.
Thanks,
tglx
On Fri 2020-08-14 12:19:33, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> printk intends to store various timestamps (MONOTONIC, REALTIME, BOOTTIME)
> to make correlation of dmesg accross different machines easier.
>
> The NMI safe timekeeper allows to retrieve these timestamps from any
> context.
For both patches:
printk intends to store various timestamps (MONOTONIC, REALTIME, BOOTTIME)
to make correlation of dmesg accross different machines easier.
The NMI safe timekeeper allows to retrieve these timestamps from any
context, but it lacks a few things:
1) The nmi safe accessors are not providing time st
5 matches
Mail list logo
