linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] [media] vb2: core: Lower the log level of debug outputs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2017 07:57:00 +0900
From:   Hirokazu Honda <hiroh@...omium.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>,
        Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
        Pawel Osciak <pawel@...iak.com>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] [media] vb2: core: Lower the log level of debug outputs

Hi,

According to patch work, this patch are not approved yet and its
status are "Changes Requested."
What changes are necessary actually?
If there is no necessary change, can you approve this patch?

Best,
Hirokazu Honda

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 14:24 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> []
>> > If there automated systems that rely on specific levels, then
>> > changing the levels of individual messages could also cause
>> > those automated systems to fail.
>>
>> Well, that might be true for some of them indeed. I was thinking about
>> our use case, which relies on particular numbers to get expected
>> verbosity levels not caring about particular messages. I guess the
>> break all or none rule is going to apply here, so we should do the
>> bitmap conversion indeed. :)
>>
>> On the other hand, I think it would be still preferable to do the
>> conversion in a separate patch.
>
> Right.  No worries.
>