linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk

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

Date:   Fri, 30 Aug 2019 15:46:13 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Tim.Bird@...y.com, brendanhiggins@...gle.com
Cc:     shuah@...nel.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
        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, rdunlap@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk

On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 21:58 +0000, Tim.Bird@...y.com wrote:
> > From: Joe Perches
[]
> IMHO %pV should be avoided if possible.  Just because people are
> doing it doesn't mean it should be used when it is not necessary.

Well, as the guy that created %pV, I of course
have a different opinion.

> >  then wouldn't it be easier to pass in the
> > > kernel level as a separate parameter and then strip off all printk
> > > headers like this:
> > 
> > Depends on whether or not you care for overall
> > object size.  Consolidated formats with the
> > embedded KERN_<LEVEL> like suggested are smaller
> > overall object size.
> 
> This is an argument I can agree with.  I'm generally in favor of
> things that lessen kernel size creep. :-)

As am I.