Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 26 Aug 2007 06:54:10 -0400 | From | "Mike Frysinger" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Prefix each line of multiline printk(KERN_<level> "foo\nbar") with KERN_<level> |
| |
On 8/26/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Joe Perches wrote: > > Corrected printk calls with multiple output lines which > > did not correctly preface each line with KERN_<level> > > > > Fixed uses of some single lines with too many KERN_<level> > > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/ecard.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/ecard.c > > @@ -547,7 +547,8 @@ static void ecard_check_lockup(struct irq_desc *desc) > > if (last == jiffies) { > > lockup += 1; > > if (lockup > 1000000) { > > - printk(KERN_ERR "\nInterrupt lockup detected - " > > + printk(KERN_ERR "\n" > > + KERN_ERR "Interrupt lockup detected - " > > "disabling all expansion card interrupts\n"); > > > > desc->chip->mask(IRQ_EXPANSIONCARD); > > What's the purpose of having lines printed with e.g. `KERN_ERR "\n"' only? > Shouldn't these just be removed? > > Usually lines starting with `\n' are continuations, but given some other > module may call printk() in between, there's no guarantee continuations > appear on the same line.
erm, i thought the prink lock was grabbed per-buffer, not per-line ... so yes, if the function calls were like printk(KERN_ERR "\n"); printk(KERN_ERR "..."); things could be broken up, but this is on function call, so it shouldnt ... -mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |