[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] printk: add KERN_CONT annotation
On Tue, 2 October 2007 07:18:52 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ah, this is even nicer than the raw_printk() thing i suggested, and it
> also nicely documents the intention of the author. Patch attached below.

KERN_CONT was brought up in the linux-tiny discussion. Not sure if you
want to get involved in that, but there may be value in adding one
variant of KERN_CONT per debug level:

> And i'd like to stress the principle that is followed here: in this
> particular case the warning is very useful, but still
> there are false positives. Fortunately they are so rare that it's worth
> annotating those few exceptions in the source. Note that the goal is
> still to be able to achieve 100% warning-free source code. _That_ should
> be the driving principle behind warnings.

Thank you for working on this. I had nearly given up on checkpatch


When people work hard for you for a pat on the back, you've got
to give them that pat.
-- Robert Heinlein
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-02 12:11    [W:0.100 / U:2.156 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site