lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/32] Kill pr_warning in the whole linux code
On Thu 2019-10-17 21:29:55, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>
>
> 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.

OK, resend them, please.

> > 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.

Yup.

Best Regards,
Petr

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-17 15:53    [W:0.071 / U:3.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site