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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:55:17 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Suggest pr_<level> over printk(KERN_<LEVEL> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 08:05:14 -0400 "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:23:03PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > Suggest the shorter pr_<level> instead of printk(KERN_<LEVEL>. > > > > Prefer to use pr_<level> over bare printks. > > Prefer to use pr_warn over pr_warning. > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> > > Is this even worth a warning? I don't think so.... mm... probably. It's not a thing I ever bother mentioning in review, but I guess pr_foo() is a bit denser, and doing the same thing in two different ways is always an irritant. I'll put the patch in my tree for a while and see how irritating I find it ;) -- 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