linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] params: replace printk(KERN_<LVL>...) with pr

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1336071041.13866.39.camel@joe2Laptop>
Date:	Thu, 03 May 2012 11:50:41 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>
Cc:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jbaron@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] params: replace printk(KERN_<LVL>...) with
 pr_<lvl>(...)

On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 11:57 -0600, Jim Cromie wrote:
> I left 1 printk which uses __FILE__, __LINE__ explicitly, which should
> not be subject to generic preferences expressed via pr_fmt().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>
> ---
>  kernel/params.c |   33 ++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/params.c b/kernel/params.c
> index be78c90..08414ba 100644
> --- a/kernel/params.c
> +++ b/kernel/params.c
> @@ -201,25 +201,21 @@ int parse_args(const char *doing,
>  		irq_was_disabled = irqs_disabled();
>  		ret = parse_one(param, val, doing, params, num,
>  				min_level, max_level, unknown);
> -		if (irq_was_disabled && !irqs_disabled()) {
> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "parse_args(): option '%s' enabled "
> -					"irq's!\n", param);
> -		}
> +		if (irq_was_disabled && !irqs_disabled())
> +			pr_warn("option '%s' enabled irq's!\n", param);
> +

The other parse_args pr_<level> uses have
	'"%s: ...", doing, ...'.
Maybe this one should too.

>  		switch (ret) {
>  		case -ENOENT:
> -			printk(KERN_ERR "%s: Unknown parameter `%s'\n",
> -			       doing, param);
> +			pr_err("%s: Unknown parameter `%s'\n", doing, param);
>  			return ret;
[]
> @@ -753,11 +746,9 @@ static struct module_kobject * __init locate_module_kobject(const char *name)
>  #endif
>  		if (err) {
>  			kobject_put(&mk->kobj);
> -			printk(KERN_ERR
> -				"Module '%s' failed add to sysfs, error number %d\n",
> +			pr_err("Module '%s' failed add to sysfs, error: %d\n"
> +				"The system will be unstable now.\n",
>  				name, err);
> -			printk(KERN_ERR
> -				"The system will be unstable now.\n");
>  			return NULL;
>  		}
>  

It'd be nice to align the arguments and perhaps a
single line output may be better.

Maybe something like:

			pr_err("Adding module '%s' to sysfs failed (%d), the system is unstable\n",
			       name, err);

though perhaps this should be pr_crit
if it's really unstable.

--
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/