mtx_lock_do_what_i_mean()

[Ed Schouten]

* Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt at mac.com> wrote:
> I would approach the problem differently: decouple printf() in the
> kernel from anything to which we have a TTY attached. Instead, look
> at printf() as a means to write to the message buffer only. Echoing
> things that go into the message buffer to the console becomes 1)
> optional (yay!), and 2) something you can do by going through the TTY
> layer (use a kthread or use a process [syslog]).

Yeah. That would be a lot better, but that means you still need to have
a lot of code to make it work properly w.r.t. kernel panics:

- When you're in the kernel debugger, you still need to have this
  synchronous programming interface to print data and read keyboard
  input.
- In this context, you need to add extra code to flush the buffer before
  printing 

I think we could look at this approach somewhere in the future, but
better not now. I'd rather not debug debugging interfaces. ;-)

-- 
 Ed Schouten <ed at 80386.nl>
 WWW: http://80386.nl/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/attachments/20090825/8cbdda2f/attachment.pgp