Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:01:53 -0700
From:      Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>
To:        Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Reducing noise in dmesg output
Message-ID:  <4A9F4DC1.4010002@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <2fd864e0909021645p735e22b8id7d41f4b5a0ee89e@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <200909010931.16880.nick@van-laarhoven.org>	<1251841416.1689.4458.camel@balrog.2hip.net>	<200909021656.15747.nick@van-laarhoven.org> <2fd864e0909021645p735e22b8id7d41f4b5a0ee89e@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> FreeBSD has historically been producing very limited output on dmesg. Linux
>> is very noisy (ever noticed the copyright notices right in the middle of
>> your list of PCI devices?). Even they have decided that they should hide
>> this behind coloured 'ok/failed' texts in some distributions.
> 
> I think this speaks more towards needing something between "Very
> Quiet" and "Give me everything every developer has ever wanted to know
> enough to include a print for it."

Other possibilities:

  * Provide a per-driver control to determine verbosity.  That would 
make it easier for developers who really do want to see "everything 
there is to know in my part of the world".

  * Put more information into the kernel buffers (and from there into 
dmesg) and less on the screen.  That would reduce visible boot verbosity 
while retaining the post-hoc debugging value of dmesg(1).

Cheers,

Tim




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A9F4DC1.4010002>