From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chen Gong Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] ACPI, CPER: Update cper info Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 22:46:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20131016024633.GC6898@gchen.bj.intel.com> References: <1381473166-29303-1-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <1381473166-29303-3-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <20131011090630.GB5925@pd.tnic> <20131011154759.GJ5925@pd.tnic> <1381888638.22110.43.camel@joe-AO722> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZmUaFz6apKcXQszQ" Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:39119 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751384Ab3JPDBq (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 23:01:46 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1381888638.22110.43.camel@joe-AO722> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Perches Cc: Borislav Petkov , tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org --ZmUaFz6apKcXQszQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 06:57:18PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:57:18 -0700 > From: Joe Perches > To: Borislav Petkov > Cc: "Chen, Gong" , tony.luck@intel.com, > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] ACPI, CPER: Update cper info > X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1=20 >=20 > On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 17:47 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:06:30AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > - printk("%s""APEI generic hardware error status\n", pfx); > > > > + printk("%s""Generic Hardware Error Status\n", pfx); > > >=20 > > > Btw, what's the story with printk not using KERN_x levels in this fil= e? > > > Why are we falling back to default printk levels for all printks here > > > and shouldn't we rather prioritize them by urgency into, say, KERN_ER= R, > > > KERN_INFO, etc? > >=20 > > Ignore that - checkpatch complained about it but I kinda missed that > > we're handing down the prefix. >=20 > I think it'd be better to rename pfx to level > as that's what printk.h calls them. >=20 No. pfx includes log level and prefix string both. >=20 >=20 --ZmUaFz6apKcXQszQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSXf4JAAoJEI01n1+kOSLHWOkQAJhLsRRp1+UevOaBPzfkyohV WndTzNt978VMD9qXucu+C1VGcXT7nr/B64mWOAeZ23fFwqWFE+VXyAITg4VN2x03 n+q2OesCdFTwkQGYs/ywdkdfW+hqtrn8VLagSMv6c5vQMjoLp63wTMsQ24g6uXmr XfI4S+xKhhVWnuX8+MzZIv0Goky2LjJxWN3wnH3e2dbKxLqWEKRCBL9fI1r1vSsx Mqd/SqShzydfE7PxG/aNsKYTyQ0T88/uWgdLmgeATJp4n1UWYRVO1Ln+LdxSkqgS nw/FGKCGatBWfuEm1x7DELTxzqeD6uWnv2xZrCiNFCVZ07PjK3iCo/ZMoxR9VbUj OY25J12IurcSqrwrQhi//QnRNt2A4F/+qelEJgVTMPqNKp/3bmgd8cWpgXjVh4Y3 /STgcJ5rnXzGAfkikNYz+e4wFlETnTcOH3fbxqC403VUNeh0Im8PmGmql2wZf+Kx J9/44hC4efj0tOtmxpFynrqsBlhVdqvlcg4rvZVAW++Y2Dd8d5BwEUwqcMR43q7V +6wUrGDW9HMKGcbOgYnkV0bcBCL32XXdFBYk1/2AewX/FTghCIeciSbb/Oct3l/k RBl5jFYDcI7feGWfnpQUGsq/KZ1DYblbxKrYWugUCyciytdITAPyvuKL1qNqsBpS EM+HPyhScc8Y+yiNpxro =yIX2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZmUaFz6apKcXQszQ--