Am 26.09.2012 23:15, schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:58:45PM +0200, Jan H. Schönherr wrote: >> Against v3.6-rc7, only lightly tested. > > Well, against linux-next and highly tested would be best. It's a bit > late to get this into linux-next for 3.7, how important is it really?
There are no conflicting commits in linux-next, so it should apply there as well. "Tested" as in: it fixes my use case: multiple printk()s shortly after each other -- with KERN_prefix but without a newline at the end. Those were sometimes concatenated since that printk-rewrite. All other printk()s that I come across more often look as usual, before and after the patch. (Mostly singular printk()s, but I also checked the output from the oom-killer.) There is no need to include this hastily -- at least not from my point of view -- as it is already broken in 3.5 and nobody else seems to notice it (... and I have now a fix for my development printk()s). Should I resend the patch later? I was also hoping that Kay might share his opinion, as the LOG_CONT flag is rather young, and he might have some different plans for it. (And of course, some more testing wouldn't hurt.) Regards Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
