[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFx_o_FfCO+c62zMWH8H8rLJsnKZ1TWvMqyUs2A90QJgGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 09:48:48 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: printk: what is going on with additional newlines?
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> In 4.13-rc, printk("foo"); printk("bar"); seems to produce
> foo\nbar. That's... quite surprising/unwelcome. What is going on
> there? Are timestamps responsible?
No.
It's actively trying to treach you not to do shit.
If you want to continue a line, you NEED to use KERN_CONT.
That has always been true. It hasn't always been enforced, though.
If you do two printk's and the second one doesn't say "I'm a
continuation", the printk logic assumes you're just confused and
wanted two lines.
And no, we are *NOT* adding code to printk to help people avoid this.
Quite the reverse.
Stop doing continuations at all please. But if you do, you'd better
use KERN_CONT. And if you don't, and you get multiple lines, it's your
own damn fault.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists