From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Nov  1 09:50:03 2006
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826C416A40F;
	Wed,  1 Nov 2006 09:50:03 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jb@what-creek.com)
Received: from what-creek.com (what-creek.com [66.111.37.70])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04EFB43D49;
	Wed,  1 Nov 2006 09:50:03 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jb@what-creek.com)
Received: by what-creek.com (Postfix, from userid 102)
	id 32210140EC03; Wed,  1 Nov 2006 09:51:27 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 09:51:27 +0000
From: John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com>
To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20061101095126.GA72578@what-creek.com>
References: <200611010454.kA14spYn014613@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20061101093550.GK15861@garage.freebsd.pl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20061101093550.GK15861@garage.freebsd.pl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, John Birrell <jb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org,
	src-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/amd64 genassym.c src/sys/arm/arm
	genassym.c src/sys/i386/i386 genassym.c src/sys/ia64/ia64
	genassym.c src/sys/kern subr_prf.c tty_cons.c
	src/sys/powerpc/powerpc genassym.c src/sys/sparc64/sparc64 ...
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 09:50:03 -0000

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> What I'd like is a global printf_lock which will allow me to put many
> separate printfs under it and be sure it won't be messed up by other
> CPUs. Having it recursive could also eliminate the need for per-CPU
> buffers, as I don't think we care about performance here.
> 
> What do you think?

I'm not a fan of having people hold a lock over one or more consoles
for very long.

That doesn't mean that others will share my opinion, though. 8-)

--
John Birrell