Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 1 Nov 2014 17:38:18 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86, cpu: trivial printk formatting fixes | From | Steven Honeyman <> |
| |
On 1 November 2014 17:19, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 03:44:56PM +0000, Steven Honeyman wrote: >> A 2 line printk makes dmesg output messy, because the second line does not get a timestamp. >> For example: >> >> [ 0.012863] CPU0: Thermal monitoring enabled (TM1) >> [ 0.012869] Last level iTLB entries: 4KB 1024, 2MB 1024, 4MB 1024 >> Last level dTLB entries: 4KB 1024, 2MB 1024, 4MB 1024, 1GB 4 >> [ 0.012958] Freeing SMP alternatives memory: 28K (ffffffff81d86000 - ffffffff81d8d000) >> [ 0.014961] dmar: Host address width 39 > > It looks just fine here, albeit with repeated timestamp: > > $ dmesg | grep -E "[id]TLB" > [ 0.269607] Last level iTLB entries: 4KB 512, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512 > [ 0.269607] Last level dTLB entries: 4KB 1024, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512, 1GB 0
That's strange! Is it the same for the other one? I just double checked on the slight chance I had an alias causing problems etc, but that wasn't the case:
$ 'dmesg'|'grep' ENERGY [ 0.010557] ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: Set to 'normal', was 'performance' ENERGY_PERF_BIAS: View and update with x86_energy_perf_policy(8) $ dmesg --version && grep --version dmesg from util-linux 2.25.2 grep (GNU grep) 2.20
On 1 November 2014 17:17, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > This changes the logging level. > > You should either mention why in the changelog > or use pr_warn_once
OK, I will resubmit with a new description if needed. Would you agree that info is a more suitable log level than warn for this message? Even notice seemed too much, as it isn't a 'significant condition'
Thanks, Steven
| |