From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 7/7] checkpatch: add pF/pf deprecation warning
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 11:24:28 -0700
Message-ID: <1505931868.12311.7.camel@perches.com>
References: <20170920162910.32053-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
         <20170920162910.32053-8-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
         <1505929138.12311.5.camel@perches.com>
         <ddf9b54b-34d9-c1e2-e34f-a1cc055b8cf7@gmx.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
To: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        James Bottomley <jejb@parisc-linux.org>
Return-path: <linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <ddf9b54b-34d9-c1e2-e34f-a1cc055b8cf7@gmx.de>
List-ID: <linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 19:53 +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 20.09.2017 19:38, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 01:29 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > We deprecated '%pF/%pf' printk specifiers, since '%pS/%ps' is now smart
> > > enough to handle function pointer dereference on platforms where such
> > > dereference is required.
> > > 
> > > checkpatch warning example:
> > > 
> > > WARNING: Use '%pS/%ps' instead. This pointer extension was deprecated: '%pF'
> > 
> > If this series is accepted,  I think this message
> > is unclear and would prefer something like:
> 
> Is it worth to mention, that it's still needed in older kernels?
> Just in case some patch get's backported.

I think probably not.

There are relatively few references and
modifications are unlikely to be backported.