From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: Add a warning for log messages that don't end in a new line
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:06:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1511773604.32426.24.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711270951450.3445@hadrien>
On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 09:52 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2017-11-26 at 23:40 -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On 26/11/17 11:34 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > It would probably be better not to mention the KERN_CONT possibility at
> > > > all.
> > >
> > > Oh? I don't disagree... but what are we supposed to do in these cases?
> > > The way v2 of my patch works it just says that there is a missing new
> > > line. But Joe calls that a false positive. So if we can't report that
> > > it's missing a new line and we can't say it looks like it needs a
> > > KERN_CONT, then what can we do? The case is obviously wrong in some way
> > > or another so we probably shouldn't just ignore it.
>
> I meant why not only suggest pr_cont?
Because checkpatch cannot know if the printk is missing a
KERN_CONT or another different KERN_<LEVEL>.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: Add a warning for log messages that don't end in a new line
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:06:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1511773604.32426.24.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711270951450.3445@hadrien>
On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 09:52 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2017-11-26 at 23:40 -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On 26/11/17 11:34 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > It would probably be better not to mention the KERN_CONT possibility at
> > > > all.
> > >
> > > Oh? I don't disagree... but what are we supposed to do in these cases?
> > > The way v2 of my patch works it just says that there is a missing new
> > > line. But Joe calls that a false positive. So if we can't report that
> > > it's missing a new line and we can't say it looks like it needs a
> > > KERN_CONT, then what can we do? The case is obviously wrong in some way
> > > or another so we probably shouldn't just ignore it.
>
> I meant why not only suggest pr_cont?
Because checkpatch cannot know if the printk is missing a
KERN_CONT or another different KERN_<LEVEL>.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-27 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-26 5:40 [PATCH v2] checkpatch: Add a warning for log messages that don't end in a new line Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 5:40 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 5:51 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 5:51 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 6:01 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-26 6:01 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-26 17:38 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 17:38 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 22:29 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-26 22:29 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711262334370.2111@hadrien>
2017-11-27 1:12 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 1:12 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 6:08 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:08 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 9:25 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 9:25 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 9:32 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 9:32 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 9:42 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 9:42 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:07 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:07 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:26 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:26 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:33 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:33 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:41 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:41 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:42 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:42 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 4:00 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 4:00 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:11 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:11 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:27 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:27 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:34 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:34 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:40 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:40 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 8:28 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 8:28 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 8:52 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 8:52 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 9:06 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2017-11-27 9:06 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 16:40 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 16:40 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:20 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:20 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:28 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:28 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:35 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:35 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:42 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:42 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 17:44 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 17:44 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 18:57 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 18:57 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 19:58 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 19:58 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 20:49 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 20:49 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 22:56 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 22:56 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-28 0:15 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-28 0:15 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-26 16:55 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 16:55 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 17:09 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 17:09 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 17:47 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 17:47 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 18:17 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 18:17 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-26 18:33 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-26 18:33 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 1:35 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 1:35 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 6:40 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:40 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:42 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:42 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:53 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:53 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2017-11-27 6:57 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 6:57 ` Julia Lawall
2017-11-27 9:03 ` Joe Perches
2017-11-27 9:03 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1511773604.32426.24.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.