[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1481852392.29291.75.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 17:39:52 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont
On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 10:37 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (12/15/16 17:23), Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Thu 2016-12-15 13:53:58, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > If CONFIG_PRINTK=n:
> > >
> > > kernel/printk/printk.c:1893: warning: ‘cont’ defined but not used
> > >
> > > Note that there are actually two different struct cont definitions and
> > > objects: the first one is used if CONFIG_PRINTK=y, the second one became
> > > unused by removing console_cont_flush().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 5c2992ee7fd8a29d ("printk: remove console flushing special cases for partial buffered lines")
> >
> > Great catch. It seems that nobody tried the build without CONFIG_PRINTK
> > at that time.
>
> ok... since the patch is a cosmetic tweak... can we add several more
> cosmetic changes to it? yes, I know, N things in one patch is "a bad thing",
> but those extra changes don't deserve to be in a separate patch.
>
> basically I'm talking about a bunch of 80-cols fixups.
> if it's irrelevant then feel free to ignore it.
While it might be nice to do some 80 column wrapping,
the most common wrap style is to the open parenthesis.
I'd also like to split up printk.c into a bunch of
smaller, more logically self-contained files eventually.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists