[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090217102737.GC6298@alberich.amd.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:27:37 +0100
From: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86: memtest: adapt log messages
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 09:46:15AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:53 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> * Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> >>> + printk(KERN_CONT "\n %010llx - %010llx pattern %016llx",
> >>> + t_start, t_start + t_size, cpu_to_be64(pattern));
> >>> +#else
> >>> + printk(KERN_CONT "\n %010llx - %010llx pattern %08x",
> >>> + t_start, t_start + t_size, cpu_to_be32(pattern));
> >>> +#endif
> >> hm, is there really no cleaner way to do this?
> >
> > Can we use this:
> >
> > + printk(KERN_CONT "\n %010llx - %010llx pattern %016llx",
> > + t_start, t_start + t_size, cpu_to_be64(pattern));
> >
>
> Only if you don't mind 8 extra zeros on 32 bits.
>
> There are other problems with this, too. There is a KERN_CONT at the
> end of it, but it starts a new line, and then doesn't have another
> priority flag.
Ok, I see. I'll replace KERN_CONT with an appropriate priority flag
and move the newline to the end of the format string.
Regards,
Andreas
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists