Re: OpenGL-based framebuffer concepts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Čt 01-06-06 17:48:57, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 6/1/06, Antonino A. Daplas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Jon Smirl wrote:
> >> On 6/1/06, Antonino A. Daplas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Jon Smirl wrote:
> >>> > On 6/1/06, D. Hazelton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Console writes are done with the console semaphore held. printk will 
> >also
> >>> just write to the log buffer and defer the actual console printing
> >>> for later, by the next or current process that will grab the semaphore.
> >>
> >> That was my original position too. But Alan Cox has drilled it into me
> >> that this is not acceptable for printks in interrupt context, they
> >> need to print there and not be deferred.
> >>
> >
> >Just to clarify, it's not my position, that's how the current printk code
> >works.
> I haven't looked at the code, but if there is just normal console
> running and nothing like X is around, doesn't the console system
> always have the semaphore? 

Not if foreground code is already printing something. Fortunately we
do not spend most of time printing text; that's why printk from
interrupt usually works.

(cesky, pictures)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux