Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Dec 2011 11:42:48 +0100 | From | Uwe Kleine-König <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] m68k/irq: don't use pr_crit in an header |
| |
Hi Geert,
(thanks for adding Joe to Cc:, I noticed that when I wanted to add him myself :-)
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:32:21AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > 2011/12/17 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>: > > Using pr_crit in an header results in funny messages. Consider > > > > #define pr_fmt(fmt) "mydriver: " fmt > > #include <linux/hardirq.h> > > > > which makes the message from ack_bad_irq > > > > mydriver: unexpected IRQ trap... > > > > so better use plain printk with KERN_CRIT directly. > > Yep, that's expected behavior, as defining pr_fmt() modifies all kernel messages > generated from that module. I'm aware it is expected, I only wondered if it is also desirable to have messages in headers modified depending on the module the header is included in.
> > This fixes a build problem on m68k with aufs3 en passant because the > > latter builds with > > > > ccflags-y += -D'pr_fmt(fmt)=AUFS_NAME"\040%s:%d:%s[%d]:\040"fmt,__func__,__LINE__,current->comm,current->pid' > > > > without providing AUFS_NAME early enough for ack_bad_irq (which is the > > problem of aufs). > > Isn't this a problem with (out of tree) aufs? > Why does it put a define that relies on an (apparently sometimes still > undefined) > variable on the build command line? This is definitily a bug in aufs that needs fixing independant of the issue of using or not using pr_... in headers.
> Any header may contain calls to pr_*(). > > > Cc: Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org> > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> > > --- > > arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq.h | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq.h > > index db30ed2..1f652e0 100644 > > --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq.h > > +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/hardirq.h > > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ > > > > static inline void ack_bad_irq(unsigned int irq) > > { > > - pr_crit("unexpected IRQ trap at vector %02x\n", irq); > > + printk(KERN_CRIT "unexpected IRQ trap at vector %02x\n", irq); > > Nack. Nowadays pr_crit(...) is recommended over "printk(KERN_CRIT ...)". I know that, I just wonder if the proponents of this recommendation are aware of the issue when using pr_* in headers. Joe?
> Besides, there are (albeit not that many yet) other callers of pr_*() in > header files. Do you plan to revert them to printk(), too? That depends on the outcome of this discussion.
> Please fix aufs instead. Thanks! I already provided a patch for that, too. (Currently only on the Debian kernel ML.)
Best regards Uwe
-- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- 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/
| |