[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170727095100.GA653@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:51:01 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@...tec.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Fabio M. Di Nitto" <fdinitto@...hat.com>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] printk/console: Enhance the check for consoles using
init memory
On (07/27/17 11:29), Petr Mladek wrote:
[..]
> > > Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
>
> Thanks for the review. I am going to push the two patches into
> for-4.14 branch so that we could get some testing via linux-next.
good. agree.
how do you think,
would pr_warn() be enough for people to notice the wrongdoing or
shall we put WARN_ON() there for a while at least? (assuming that
people pay more attention to backtraces).
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists