linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] m68k/mac: More printk modernization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:59:27 +0200
From:   Kars de Jong <jongk@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] m68k/mac: More printk modernization

2017-10-27 4:45 GMT+02:00 Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>:
> Log message fragments used to be printed on one line but now get split up.
> Fix this. Also, suppress log spam that merely prints known pointer values.
>
> Tested-by: Stan Johnson <userm57@...oo.com>
> Signed-off-by: Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
> ---
>  arch/m68k/mac/baboon.c |  2 +-
>  arch/m68k/mac/iop.c    |  4 ++--
>  arch/m68k/mac/psc.c    |  6 ++----
>  arch/m68k/mac/via.c    | 18 +++++-------------
>  4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

...

> diff --git a/arch/m68k/mac/psc.c b/arch/m68k/mac/psc.c
> index 439a2a2e5874..8d547df4e16c 100644
> --- a/arch/m68k/mac/psc.c
> +++ b/arch/m68k/mac/psc.c
> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static void psc_debug_dump(void)
>                 return;
>
>         for (i = 0x30 ; i < 0x70 ; i += 0x10) {
> -               printk("PSC #%d:  IFR = 0x%02X IER = 0x%02X\n",
> +               printk(KERN_DEBUG "PSC #%d:  IFR = 0x%02X IER = 0x%02X\n",
>                         i >> 4,
>                         (int) psc_read_byte(pIFRbase + i),
>                         (int) psc_read_byte(pIERbase + i));

Any particular reason why you didn't use pr_debug() here? I'm guessing
it's because this is not a known pointer value?

Kars.