* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:48:25 +0200 Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >> this is actually a false positive - as the debug code constructs a
> > >> printk output _without_ \n. So the script should check whether there's
> > >> any \n in the printk string - if there is none, do not emit a warning.
> > >> (if you implement that then i think it can remain a warning and does not
> > >> need to move to CHECK.)
> > >>
> > >
> > > Yeah, it does that sometimes. I don't think it's fixable within the scope
> > > of checkpatch. It needs to check whether some preceding printk which
> > > might
> > > not even be in the patch has a \n:
> > >
> > > printk(KERN_ERR "foo");
> > > <100 lines of whatever>
> > > + printk("bar\n");
> > >
> > > we're screwed...
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Isn't that broken on SMP (or with preemption) anyway?
>
> Yep. Or with interrupts...
not if it's a boot-time only debug check before SMP bringup. (as it is
in sched.c) We could make this intention explicit via a simple
raw_printk() wrapper to printk, which could be used without KERN_.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
