Messages in this thread | | | From | Brendan Higgins <> | Date | Fri, 30 Aug 2019 16:02:13 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk |
| |
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 3:46 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 21:58 +0000, Tim.Bird@sony.com wrote: > > > From: Joe Perches > [] > > IMHO %pV should be avoided if possible. Just because people are > > doing it doesn't mean it should be used when it is not necessary. > > Well, as the guy that created %pV, I of course > have a different opinion. > > > > then wouldn't it be easier to pass in the > > > > kernel level as a separate parameter and then strip off all printk > > > > headers like this: > > > > > > Depends on whether or not you care for overall > > > object size. Consolidated formats with the > > > embedded KERN_<LEVEL> like suggested are smaller > > > overall object size. > > > > This is an argument I can agree with. I'm generally in favor of > > things that lessen kernel size creep. :-) > > As am I.
Sorry, to be clear, we are talking about the object size penalty due to adding a single parameter to a function. Is that right?
| |