[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0cb282d85c37d9b626933a03574848d17430f04c.camel@perches.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 17:23:59 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] rcu: Use pr_fmt to prefix "rcu: " to logging
output
On Mon, 2018-05-14 at 16:58 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> OK, so if I define pr_fmt as follows, I get the old behavior?
>
> #define pr_fmt(fmt) fmt
yes.
> I just queued
> a commit to be squashed into my version of your patch 18/18 that adds
> this to kernel/rcu/rcu_segcblist.c. This joins the ones that your
> patch added to kernel/rcu/srcutree.c and kernel/rcu/tree.c.
>
> Should I also add "#define pr_fmt(fmt) "rcu: " fmt" to these files?
>
> kernel/rcu/srcutiny.c
> kernel/rcu/sync.c
> kernel/rcu/tiny.c
Well, I don't actually remember why the define
was added to rcu_segcblist.c.
Most of this was done via a script which looked
for pr_<level> uses without a pr_fmt in the same
file.
Dunno why rcu_segcblist was modified.
Maybe it was a braino.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists