[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101020035346.GA20178@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:53:46 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@....nl>,
Alistair John Strachan <alistair@...zero.co.uk>,
Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>,
"Mark M. Hoffman" <mhoffman@...htlink.com>,
Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@...il.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Juerg Haefliger <juergh@...il.com>,
Eric Piel <eric.piel@...mplin-utc.net>,
Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>,
Roger Lucas <vt8231@...denengine.co.uk>,
"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/hwmon: Use pr_fmt and pr_<level>
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:34:18PM -0400, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 20:29 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:13:40PM -0400, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Convert printks to pr_<level>
> > > Coalesce long formats
> > > Removed prefixes from formats
> > > Added #define pr_fmt KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> > > Standardized abitguru messages for reporting and finding MAINTAINER
> > > Compiled x86 allyesconfig only.
> > > I inspected "strings drivers/hwmon/built-in.o",
> > > but it's otherwise untested.
> > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
> > There are several lines longer than 80 characters.
> > Does this rule no longer apply ?
>
> 80 columns isn't checked for printk format strings.
>
Interesting.
> A kernel general preference may be to keep formats as
> a single string without line breaks so that grep works
> better.
>
> > Oddly enough, there are only four checkpatch warnings about long lines,
> > even though there are many more.
>
> The version I use doesn't show any warnings.
>
checkpatch.pl from both v2.6.36-rc7 and v2.6.36-rc6 do report warnings.
Looks like those versions flag long lines for pr_warn. Is your version
older or newer ?
Anyway, would it be possible to split the patch into one patch per file ?
I don't know how Jean thinks about it, but in my opinion it would be cleaner,
permit revert on a single patch/file instead of having to revert the entire series,
it would simplify review, and it would make it much easier to cherry-pick
pieces into other releases if needed.
Thanks,
Guenter
--
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