[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170206082739.18a47c8e@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:27:39 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Calvin Owens <calvinowens@...com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 4/8] printk: always use deferred printk when flush
printk_safe lines
On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 13:16:52 +0100
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
> > > just in case, the patch (which I prefer to be ignored)
> >
> > let's keep printk_safe_flush_line().
>
> I do not have strong opinion but I would slightly prefer
> to keep the helper function. The use of printk_deferred()
> is a bit tricky and it is better to have only one copy.
>
> Steven, could you live with the original patch, please?
Sure, but make it into a static inline.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists