From: "\"Jan H. Schönherr\"" <schnhrr@cs.tu-berlin.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Kay Sievers <kay@vrfy.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: drop ambiguous LOG_CONT flag
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:33:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <506382B0.8040908@cs.tu-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120926211526.GA30261@kroah.com>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-26 22:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-26 17:58 [PATCH] printk: drop ambiguous LOG_CONT flag Jan H. Schönherr
2012-09-26 21:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-09-26 22:33 ` "Jan H. Schönherr" [this message]
2012-09-27 13:39 ` Kay Sievers
2012-09-27 15:46 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-27 16:04 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-28 8:25 ` Jan H. Schönherr
2012-09-28 14:34 ` Kay Sievers
2012-09-28 14:49 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-28 14:56 ` Kay Sievers
2012-10-08 19:24 ` Kay Sievers
2012-10-08 19:54 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-10-08 19:56 ` Kay Sievers
2012-11-02 3:53 ` Kay Sievers
2012-11-02 22:37 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-11-02 23:36 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-11-03 21:12 ` [PATCH resend] " Jan H. Schönherr
2012-11-10 18:47 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-10-08 23:10 ` [PATCH] " Joe Perches
2012-09-28 2:28 ` Kay Sievers
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=506382B0.8040908@cs.tu-berlin.de \
--to=schnhrr@cs.tu-berlin.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kay@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.