[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8bd0f97a0907061336p1a6e5113o4407ff28684310a2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 16:36:19 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove multiple KERN_ prefixes from printk formats
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 16:33, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VERBOSE
>> > - printk(KERN_EMERG "\n" KERN_EMERG "Double Fault\n");
>> > + printk(KERN_EMERG "Double Fault\n");
>>
>> dropped a newline. we've largely made sure the newlines and such were
>> as we want in the output ... in this case, it is not a matter of
>> adding a newline where one did not exist before
>
> Note that the 'printk' itself will add a required newline these days.
>
> So unless you want an _empty_ line due to an earlier '\n', the change is
> correct.
>
> If you do want the empty line, it should looke like
>
> printk(KERN_EMERG "\nDouble Fault\n");
>
> but I suspect that you had the '\n' there because you had a previous
> printk which hadn't ended the line (in which case just removing it and
> relying on the KERN_EMERG causing a line break is the right thing to do).
yes, the newlines here were explicit, not follow up to previous ones
missing lines. i ignored the ones Joe (correctly) dropped due to
appending rather than explicit spacing.
-mike
--
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