[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wh6WP0Wq=rbC2Md6vsFrV-+nvDjxgfx9NpMzUmVFNkJ9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 17:27:13 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Schwartz <matthew.schwartz@...ux.dev>, Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, Mikhail Gavrilov <mikhail.v.gavrilov@...il.com>,
Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, quan.zhou@...iatek.com,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, lorenzo@...nel.org, ryder.lee@...iatek.com,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 6.19-rc1 mediatek mt7921e broke badly
On Tue, 30 Dec 2025 at 15:57, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> I would recommend reverting f804a5895eba instead of trying
> fix it. Then find a better way to eliminate extra newline that
> shows up in dmesg when firmware build date happens to have
> a newline.
Yeah. Let's revert it.
And the way to fix the extra newline is trivial: just remove it from
the "dev_info()" format string.
Our kernel printing logic will add a newline for the next line anyway
if it is missing (unless somebody explicitly uses PR_CONT).
Can whoever saw the problem confirm that just a revert and a "remove
\n from that dev_info()" fixes the output for them?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists