linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/11] RISC-V: Use common print prefix in smp.c

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]

Message-ID: <87lf5tdw9z.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jul 2021 14:44:56 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/11] RISC-V: Use common print prefix in smp.c

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:38:42 +0100,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com> wrote:
> 
> We add "#define pr_fmt()" in smp.c to use "riscv:" as common
> print prefix for all pr_xyz() statements in this file.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
> Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...il.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c | 9 +++++----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> index 547dc508f7d1..eea0c9d11d9f 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>   * Copyright (C) 2017 SiFive
>   */
>  
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "riscv: " fmt
>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>  #include <linux/clockchips.h>
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> @@ -114,7 +115,7 @@ static void send_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, enum ipi_message_type op)
>  	if (ipi_ops && ipi_ops->ipi_inject)
>  		ipi_ops->ipi_inject(mask);
>  	else
> -		pr_warn("SMP: IPI inject method not available\n");
> +		pr_warn("IPI inject method not available\n");
>  }
>  
>  static void send_ipi_single(int cpu, enum ipi_message_type op)
> @@ -126,7 +127,7 @@ static void send_ipi_single(int cpu, enum ipi_message_type op)
>  	if (ipi_ops && ipi_ops->ipi_inject)
>  		ipi_ops->ipi_inject(cpumask_of(cpu));
>  	else
> -		pr_warn("SMP: IPI inject method not available\n");
> +		pr_warn("IPI inject method not available\n");

"SMP:" made a lot more sense. I assume that the user knows that they
are using a RISC-V machine. On the other hand, seeing a "SMP:" prefix
for a message indicates the provenance of the message.

I honestly don't see the point in this change.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.