linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm: Replace DRM_INFO() with 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]

Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2022 17:15:00 +0100
From:   Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
To:     Siddh Raman Pant <code@...dh.me>
Cc:     maarten lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        maxime ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        david airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        daniel vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: Replace DRM_INFO() with pr_info()

Hi

Am 19.12.22 um 16:34 schrieb Siddh Raman Pant:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2022 20:27:45 +0530, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Am 19.12.22 um 15:23 schrieb Siddh Raman Pant:
>>> Line 536 of drm_print.h says DRM_INFO() is deprecated
>>> in favor of pr_info().
>>
>> That's a misleading comment. DRM_INFO() is deprecated for drm_info().
>> pr_info() et al is only to be used of you don't have a dev pointer.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Thomas
> 
> Maybe you are confusing it with DRM_DEV_INFO? It takes the dev pointer,
> and is indeed told to be deprecated in favour of drm_info() in the
> comments (see line 394).
> 
> DRM_INFO is a separate macro for printing stuff, and does not take the
> dev pointer. They seem to be early wrappers for printk, I guess when
> pr_info did not exist. And all they do different from pr_info is to add
> DRM_NAME (which seems to be just "drm") in front of the string.

The DRM_ print macros in capital letters are deprecated AFAIK. In cases 
where a dev pointer is available, using drm_info() et al. is preferred 
over pr_info().

In the context of your patch, you should use drm_info() in 
drm_client_target_cloned(), as is gets a dev pointer as its first 
argument. In most the other cases from your patch, you can get the dev 
pointer from connector->dev.

The final case, drm_legacy_pci_exit(), there's no dev pointer, so you 
can use pr_info() there. I'd remove '[drm]' from the string. We don't 
use this much elsewhere.

Best regards
Thomas

> 
> Thanks,
> Siddh

-- 
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev

Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (841 bytes)