public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "\"Jan H. Schönherr\"" <schnhrr@cs.tu-berlin.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Kay Sievers <kay@vrfy.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: drop ambiguous LOG_CONT flag
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:33:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <506382B0.8040908@cs.tu-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120926211526.GA30261@kroah.com>

Am 26.09.2012 23:15, schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:58:45PM +0200, Jan H. Schönherr wrote:
>> Against v3.6-rc7, only lightly tested.
> 
> Well, against linux-next and highly tested would be best.  It's a bit
> late to get this into linux-next for 3.7, how important is it really?

There are no conflicting commits in linux-next, so it should apply there
as well.

"Tested" as in: it fixes my use case: multiple printk()s shortly after each
other -- with KERN_prefix but without a newline at the end. Those were
sometimes concatenated since that printk-rewrite.

All other printk()s that I come across more often look as usual, before and
after the patch. (Mostly singular printk()s, but I also checked the output
from the oom-killer.)

There is no need to include this hastily -- at least not from my point of view
-- as it is already broken in 3.5 and nobody else seems to notice it
(... and I have now a fix for my development printk()s). Should I resend the
patch later?

I was also hoping that Kay might share his opinion, as the LOG_CONT
flag is rather young, and he might have some different plans for it.

(And of course, some more testing wouldn't hurt.)

Regards
Jan




  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-26 22:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-26 17:58 [PATCH] printk: drop ambiguous LOG_CONT flag Jan H. Schönherr
2012-09-26 21:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-09-26 22:33   ` "Jan H. Schönherr" [this message]
2012-09-27 13:39     ` Kay Sievers
2012-09-27 15:46       ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-27 16:04         ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-28  8:25           ` Jan H. Schönherr
2012-09-28 14:34             ` Kay Sievers
2012-09-28 14:49               ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-09-28 14:56                 ` Kay Sievers
2012-10-08 19:24                   ` Kay Sievers
2012-10-08 19:54                     ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-10-08 19:56                       ` Kay Sievers
2012-11-02  3:53                         ` Kay Sievers
2012-11-02 22:37                           ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-11-02 23:36                             ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-11-03 21:12                               ` [PATCH resend] " Jan H. Schönherr
2012-11-10 18:47                                 ` "Jan H. Schönherr"
2012-10-08 23:10                       ` [PATCH] " Joe Perches
2012-09-28  2:28         ` Kay Sievers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=506382B0.8040908@cs.tu-berlin.de \
    --to=schnhrr@cs.tu-berlin.de \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kay@vrfy.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox