Re: + kernelh-printk-panic-string-cleanup.patch added to -mm tree

Dave Young
2010-02-25T01:55:55Z

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:07:15PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
>>
>> The patch titled
>>      kernel.h: printk/panic/string cleanup
>> has been added to the -mm tree.  Its filename is
>>      kernelh-printk-panic-string-cleanup.patch
>>
>> Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
>>    a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
>>    b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
>>    c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
>>       reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
>>
>> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
>>
>> See http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
>> out what to do about this
>>
>> The current -mm tree may be found at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/
>
>
>
> Andrew, please don't merge this patch.
>
> I'm not against the idea kernel.h gets split up a bit, by having
> a prink.h and panic.h included from kernel.h for example.
>
> But this patch breaks bisection: some tracing general helpers are
> removed here but re-integrated in a different header only in a subsequent
> patch in the series. This should be done in the same patch, otherwise it
> breaks the build in the middle of the set.

Yeah, my wrong, I will send a update version of this patch. Thank you.

>
> The other problem, as Steve noticed, is that the tracing prototypes are
> moved in ring_buffer.h (in the subsequent patch), which is not the right
> place as the ring buffer is not only for tracing purpose. And also
> it moves functions out of kernel.h while these are really useful for
> general purposes.
>
> That said, it's probably sane to think about a new header to put
> these tracing prototypes, if it's included by kernel.h,
> linux/ftrace.h is already filled with non-general purpose things.
> So may be linux/trace.h ? Yeah this could be confusing, Steve what
> do you think?
>
> And all in one, it would probably better to split this in three
> patches: one that moves printk helpers out of kernel.h to printk.h,
> another following the same pattern for panic things and another one
> for tracing things.

Fine to me.

>
> Thanks.
>
>

--
Regards
dave