Prev: [PATCH] ieee802154: Fix oops during ieee802154_sock_ioctl
Next: regulator: Allow regulator-regulator supplies to be specified by name
From: H. Peter Anvin on 26 Apr 2010 11:00 On 04/26/2010 07:35 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote: >>> >>> Wouldn't it be better to switch to, say, serial console here to avoid >>> the NULL check in early_printk()? >>> >> This would be another possibility. >> >> However, since the serial console was not explicitly selected, it would possibly >> not be initialized. My understanding is that Peter had a problem with that. >> >> One can argue that it would still be better to select the serial console in that case, >> even though it might not be initialized. Actually, most likely it is (if it exists), >> since the system must presumably have some means to communicate with the world. >> >> I am pretty much open to either option, if that results in the patch being accepted. >> Just let me know which way to go. > > Peter? Yes, I really don't want to issue bytes to a serial port that isn't known to be initialized; it could take a *very* long time even if the port is actually present, and if the port *isn't* present it could hang the kernel. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |