Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] arm64: Use pr_* instead of printk

[Mitchel Humpherys <mitchelh@codeaurora.org>]

On Mon, Apr 28 2014 at 09:59:14 PM, Jungseok Lee <jays.lee@samsung.com> wrote:
> This patch fixed the following checkpatch complaint as using pr_*
> instead of printk.
>
> WARNING: printk() should include KERN_ facility level
>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jungseok Lee <jays.lee@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Sungjinn Chung <sungjinn.chung@samsung.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c |   14 +++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> index 7ffaddd..0484e81 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
>  	fs = get_fs();
>  	set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
>  
> -	printk("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
> +	pr_emerg("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);

Currently this printk is being called with lvl=KERN_EMERG or lvl="". In
the case of lvl=KERN_EMERG leaving lvl in is redundant. In the case of
lvl="" this is a behavioral change (printing to a different log
level). Was this intended?

>  
>  	for (first = bottom & ~31; first < top; first += 32) {
>  		unsigned long p;
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
>  					sprintf(str + i * 9, " ????????");
>  			}
>  		}
> -		printk("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);
> +		pr_emerg("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);

Ditto

>  	}
>  
>  	set_fs(fs);
> @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static void dump_instr(const char *lvl, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  			break;
>  		}
>  	}
> -	printk("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);
> +	pr_emerg("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);

Ditto. Also called with with lvl=KERN_INFO.


Mitch

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation