linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] kobject: use pr

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gntQsDjqs17g=165if4g9rYR3C2vzKkXnjzt6b87kE+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 19:12:45 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, yuzibode@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] kobject: use pr_warn to replace printk

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 1:54 PM YU Bo <tsu.yubo@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 10:39:57AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 4:11 AM Bo YU <tsu.yubo@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> This is a fix to replace printk with pr_warn
> >
> >You call it a "fix", but what exactly is wrong with the code as is?
> Is there any differentions between pr_* and printk?
> If they were the same with functionial, i think it  would be better
> to use pr_* to replace printk.There are two lines code with printk only
> and others are pr_* in kobject_uevent.c.
> In fact,as you know, the code is fine.I just want to keep consistency with
> looks like

OK, so please don't call it a "fix" as doing so suggests a functional
defect in the current code that is addressed by your patch which is
not the case.

You can write something like

"Replace printk() with pr_warn() in kobject_synth_uevent() to make it
consistent with the other code in kobject_uevent.c."

in the changelog which would be clear enough IMO.