From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Douglas Gilbert Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] scsi_error: do not display kernel pointer in message logs Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:39:22 -0500 Message-ID: <54B2C35A.4050005@interlog.com> References: <1420699430-9492-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <1420699430-9492-10-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B40295A730091@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net> Reply-To: dgilbert@interlog.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp.infotech.no ([82.134.31.41]:42645 "EHLO smtp.infotech.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751044AbbAKSjm (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:39:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B40295A730091@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" , Hannes Reinecke , James Bottomley Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" On 15-01-10 02:17 PM, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi- >> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Hannes Reinecke >> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 12:44 AM >> To: James Bottomley >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; Hannes Reinecke >> Subject: [PATCH 9/9] scsi_error: do not display kernel pointer in >> message logs >> >> It is not good practice to display the kernel pointer >> in any message logs, and it doesn't display any additional >> information. And as we know have block-layer assigned tags >> we can use them to differentiate the messages. >> So remove any pointer references from the displayed messages. >> >> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke >> --- >> drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------- >> ------- >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c >> index e42fff6..10ffa21 100644 >> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c >> @@ -124,41 +124,37 @@ scmd_eh_abort_handler(struct work_struct *work) > ... >> SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(3, >> scmd_printk(KERN_INFO, scmd, >> - "scmd %p eh timeout, " >> - "not retrying aborted " >> - "command\n", scmd)); >> + "eh timeout, not retrying " >> + "aborted command\n")); > > checkpatch allows/encourages keeping strings on one line even when > they go past the 80th column. So, I recommend joining those two > lines. Which in turn conflicts with cleanfile which is another kernel supplied utility. So I would suggest checkpatch should back off with that particular warning (and several other of its nags). Also new code (say a complete new function) should be treated differently compared to a patch (e.g. the 2 lines shown above) on existing code. I use cleanfile in the user space since it warns of lines greater than 79 characters and trims trailing spaces (whitespaces ?) from the end of a line. And I would never use checkpatch in the user space since the coherence of the resulting source is much more important than the route to get there :-) Doug Gilbert