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:	Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:38:55 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <>
To:	Andreas Dilger <>
Cc:	FD Cami <>,,,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kasper Sandberg <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] extX: convert prink(KERN_WARNING) to extX_warning()

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:31:07 -0600 Andreas Dilger wrote:

> On Jun 22, 2008  20:18 +0200, FD Cami wrote:
> > This patch takes a shot at replacing the direct use of printk(KERN_WARNING)
> > in extX by extX_warning. We now get the device number in the warning message :
> > "EXT3-fs warning (device hda1): ext3_setup_super: maximal mount count reached, running e2fsck is recommended"
> > It also adds the device information on a pair of printk(KERN_ERR) (this was
> > first suggested by Kasper two weeks ago).
> The one issue is that KERN_ERR != KERN_WARNING, so these errors might
> not be visible on the console, or may not be saved to the syslog.  The
> other minor difference is that the function name is also printed, and this
> makes the error message very long.
> One suggestion is to create a separate macro that passes the KERN_*
> flag and __func__ to ext3_console_msg(), and call that from
> ext3_warning() and a new ext3_start_error() function.  I always found
> it annoying to have to specify __func__ as a parameter for every call.
> >  	ext3_warning(sb, __func__,
> > -		     "updating to rev %d because of new feature flag, "
> > -		     "running e2fsck is recommended",
> > -		     EXT3_DYNAMIC_REV);
> > +			"updating to rev %d because of new feature flag, "
> > +			"running e2fsck is recommended",
> > +			EXT3_DYNAMIC_REV);
> Please don't change all of the indenting.  The old indending is proper
> linux coding style (aligned with previous '('), the new one is not.

I don't mind which way it's done, but I'm curious:  are you saying that aligning
with '(' is codified (e.g., in CodingStyle) or just that it's dominant?

> Note that you need to split up the patches for ext2, ext3, ext4 into
> separate emails.  I'd suggest just sending one of them until we agree
> on what is right, then submitting the rest afterward.

Linux Plumbers Conference, 17-19 September 2008, Portland, Oregon USA
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists