Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/32] Kill pr_warning in the whole linux code | From | Kefeng Wang <> | Date | Thu, 17 Oct 2019 21:29:55 +0800 |
| |
On 2019/10/17 21:05, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Tue 2019-10-08 14:39:32, Kefeng Wang wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On 2019/10/2 16:55, Petr Mladek wrote: >>> Linus, >>> >>> On Fri 2019-09-20 14:25:12, Kefeng Wang wrote: >>>> There are pr_warning and pr_warng to show WARNING level message, >>>> most of the code using pr_warn, number based on next-20190919, >>>> >>>> pr_warn: 5189 pr_warning: 546 (tools: 398, others: 148) >>> >>> The ratio is 10:1 in favor of pr_warn(). It would make sense >>> to remove the pr_warning(). >>> >>> Would you accept pull request with these 32 simple patches >>> for rc2, please? >>> >>> Alternative is to run a simple sed. But it is not trivial >>> to fix indentation of the related lines. >> >> Kindly ping, should I respin patches with comments fixed? >> Is the patchset acceptable, hope to be clear that what to do next :) > > I am going to check how many conflicts appeared in linux-next. > > If there are only few then I'll take it via printk.git. This way > we get proper indentation and other changes.
There are some conflicts(not too much), and I have already rebased on next-20191017 with comment fixed, added Reviewed-by/Acked-by. I could resend them ASAP if necessary. > > If there are too many conflicts then I'll ask Linus to do a mass > change using a script.
For tools parts(api/bpf/perf, patch [29-31]), it renames pr_warning to pr_warn, and make manually changes in some place, simply 'sed' maybe not enough.
Thanks Kefeng
> > I am sorry for late reply. I have never pushed such a mass change. > I hoped that anyone more experienced will provide some opinion ;-) > > Best Regards, > Petr > > . >
| |