linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] treewide: Add and use dev_fmt similar to pr

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, 9 May 2018 12:22:46 -0500
From:   Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] treewide: Add and use dev_fmt similar to pr_fmt

On 05/09/2018 12:04 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 11:47 -0500, Corey Minyard wrote:
>> On 05/09/2018 10:15 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> The pr_fmt mechanism exists for pr_<level> logging message prefixing,
>>> but no similar capability exists for dev_<level> message prefixing.
>>>
>>> Many uses of dev_<level> have an embedded prefix for logging output.
>>>
>>> So add a similar dev_fmt macro that can automatically prefix the
>>> dev_<level> logging output.
>>>
>>> Rename the existing dev_<level> functions to _dev_<level> and add new
>>> macros that call _dev_<level> with the desired prefix if defined.
>>>
>>> The new default #define for dev_fmt is blank.
>>>
>>> Convert ipmi and infiniband to use this mechanism.
>> The IPMI changes look good to me.
> Oh good.
>
>> There are some conflicts with a patch I have pulling out the proc
>> interface that is destined for 3.18.
> I'm sure you mean 4.18.

Oops, yes :).  I was just looking at a 3.x kernel and it stuck in my brain.

>> I can take the IPMI changes into my tree, if you want.
> These patches are not at all urgent and were done
> on top of next-20180509.
>
> As there are dependencies between the patch that
> introduces dev_fmt and the reset of the patches,
> I think it makes sense to take these as a single
> patchset rather than take parts into various trees.

The dependency isn't hard, the changes work without dev_fmt,
it just won't print the prefix.  But I'm fine with you keeping
them.

>
> Respinning the IPMI patches is trivial and can be
> done whenever appropriate.
>
> When do you expect your IPMI patches to hit -next?
>
I went ahead and pulled it in now, it's been tested well enough
in my tree.

For patches 3, 4, and 5:

Acked-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>