[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 15:36:46 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] power: user: Standardize "Syncing filesystems ..."
message
On Fri 2015-06-05 08:07:38, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 12:37 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Thu 2015-06-04 11:36:48, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Instead of a two individual printks that would generally be
> > > emitted on a single line, emit 2 lines to make the start
> > > and end of the synchronization more easily timeable.
> []
> > > diff --git a/kernel/power/user.c b/kernel/power/user.c
> []
> > > @@ -221,9 +221,9 @@ static long snapshot_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd,
> > > if (data->frozen)
> > > break;
> > >
> > > - printk("Syncing filesystems ... ");
> > > + printk("Syncing filesystems ...\n");
> > > sys_sync();
> > > - printk("done.\n");
> > > + printk("Syncing filesystems: done\n");
> >
> > You converted " ..." -> "..." elsewhere, so why not here?
>
> Missed that one.
>
> > Is splitting message to two lines a good idea?
>
> I think the "done" is unnecessary actually.
Well... if it is not neccessary for timing, this change can be safely
dropped, as timing will be provided for existing code, too.
> As there's no newline on the first, printk is
> async and can be interleaved by other threads.
...which will probably never happen here, due to feezer.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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