[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190828094929.GA14038@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 18:49:29 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
frowand.list@...il.com, sboyd@...nel.org, pmladek@...e.com,
sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk
On (08/28/19 02:31), Brendan Higgins wrote:
[..]
> Previously KUnit assumed that printk would always be present, which is
> not a valid assumption to make. Fix that by removing call to
> vprintk_emit, and calling printk directly.
>
> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/0352fae9-564f-4a97-715a-fabe016259df@kernel.org/T/#t
> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
[..]
> -static void kunit_vprintk(const struct kunit *test,
> - const char *level,
> - struct va_format *vaf)
> -{
> - kunit_printk_emit(level[1] - '0', "\t# %s: %pV", test->name, vaf);
> -}
This patch looks good to me. I like the removal of recursive
vsprintf() (%pV).
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists