Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: janitoring printk with no KERN_ constants, kill all defaults? | From | Daniele Pizzoni <> | Date | Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:20:08 +0200 |
| |
On ven, 2004-10-15 at 17:46, Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:44:59PM +0200, Daniele Pizzoni wrote: > > > I ask, what rationale there is behind checking all printks to include > > the "appropriate" constant? Should then we make printk fail when called > > without KERN_ constant? Or can I force with a sed script all defaulted > > printk to KERN_WARNING? > > No. Consider this.. > > printk (KERN_INFO "blah blah "); > if (foo) > printk ("%s", stringptr); > else > printk ("%d", number); > printk ("\n"); > > There's nothing wrong with any of those printk's, so you > cannot do the checks you mention above.
Let me understand... You mean that we should check printk constants for _consistency_ in their context (that is: for buggish printk code). So printk without KERN_* constant are not an issue (and the janitors TODO list entry is a bit puzzling)?
Thanks for helping Daniele
- 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/
| |