linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] procfs: use WARN() rather than printk+backtrace

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081023063028.684fa22e@infradead.org>
Date:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:30:28 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] procfs: use WARN() rather than printk+backtrace

On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:35:47 +0400
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:46:12AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > -			printk(KERN_WARNING "proc_dir_entry
> > '%s/%s' already registered\n",
> > +			WARN(1, KERN_WARNING "proc_dir_entry
> > '%s/%s' already registered\n",
> 
> Applied to proc.git
> 
> As a side note, seeing WARN twice on this line is depressing, and
> people use WARN(, KERN_ERR);
> 
> I mean, how hard is to get something conceptually simple as warning
> right? 

if we were consistent about which level we wanted these things at we
could fold that into the macro. Sadly that's not the case ;(
(and then there's the issue with multilines etc)
Also, WARN() tries to be as printk() compatible as possible, and that
includes the log level....

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/