From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE4DE15B12A; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:17:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712758645; cv=none; b=o2bRg+vCO4BM2cU2JAE4QiOQNulAyFw8c1XqVff0Qu20bdM2hA56ed7pfIC2rD8br/7yTNaRDp7IdtqBiw1jOiH7M/qP1CLZhMJkuxZ2q9NYRpiYQHkfmUskL+OniJ3mwG7ceaEfeEvnJNmVZEXzwkNYEcBj9f9GYAVVqSYeXcI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712758645; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iiLXM1gHb2fTzL1lNsUML+2NbfICPf9BJeU7hfbuI6k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=h4z6HxxZPtBzaJB3RZXrPINYq/omKg3Yt0SOavIO4mmjbW9kGWzMHgTJCffhjh39OQh4nfhV6osPG+vFv489qoAYXKjhBwuWvL8hFIfCHu+RWZDU5XTqL6DjmtSckXmKTnohAqwnOYzBV2kKTs87bRvJQ7DaHXhRzcIqYOk9UuM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=HyGuA7aN; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=4xJUkqSe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="HyGuA7aN"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="4xJUkqSe" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1712758642; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dKudWSPi1Iu7TxLjPm3UxpQgYscfG9LL8/XF7l+GrvA=; b=HyGuA7aNqIHvi+4YBZ2QTOZarh53jTI7l8pcSR0KU9yTM0x6W08XWU/pG67KKgdebK+sIX FwjoVZmyg7O6xEUcvy+MO47yD03ffWBG/lff3YyabpnGJKHwoaheyhwW5IP8k9wEfXefaF mYA/SjvfDZJZ+GKi2/1UsSyopdwaYdea5VK+/9Nr6IAnCdWrbNvA+4ezEc0FS8/ORLA2Ae 0koMqYMoes8RWFR8DrFeCRaZJ93fDlcnb2QUW9W+gXdKfhuFJpYMazyq1XlKIkYJx1OGKA 7GcCYStS4+NRnOcXxE9Xnrn+uwyydjRUi4I/lXtbSu2V6sqJgXLpz/ph/JC4Cw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1712758642; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dKudWSPi1Iu7TxLjPm3UxpQgYscfG9LL8/XF7l+GrvA=; b=4xJUkqSelu6YTEbO70Sq2RQ639AxhkKBi91Xaeg78LxGCFeiiaamNADOI/cbtpAQXtMwxa U0veKRge4GuNBODg== To: Bitao Hu , dianders@chromium.org, liusong@linux.alibaba.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, pmladek@suse.com, kernelfans@gmail.com, deller@gmx.de, npiggin@gmail.com, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, yaoma@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv12 1/4] genirq: Provide a snapshot mechanism for interrupt statistics In-Reply-To: References: <20240306125208.71803-1-yaoma@linux.alibaba.com> <20240306125208.71803-2-yaoma@linux.alibaba.com> <87frvu7t85.ffs@tglx> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:17:21 +0200 Message-ID: <875xwp480e.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, Apr 10 2024 at 14:45, Bitao Hu wrote: > On 2024/4/9 17:58, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > By the way, what do you think of my reason for using printk() instead of > pr_crit()? Should I change this part of the code in v13? Either way is fine. Just put a proper explanation into the change log if you stick with printk(). Thanks, tglx