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  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:	Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:18:28 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <>
To:	"Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1" <>
Cc:	<>, <>,
	<>, <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Make the pr_*() family of macros in kernel.h

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 06:27:04 -0700 "Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1" <> wrote:

> I realize this e-mail might be nuisance and time waster for you but I'm
> in need of advice. I apologize in advance for any commonsense cultural
> conventions I'm breaking.
> I sent the below patch to four e-mail lists and it lead to orthogonal
> conversations about how the entire kernel logging system/mechanisms need
> to be re-written and thus such incremental improvements as these get out
> of focus...
> In this case I started needing pr_err() and discovered that is defined
> already four times but not with global visibility as some other pr_*()
> from kernel.h (a subset of the entire family). I chose not to define it
> yet the fifth time but clean up the existing definitions and complete
> the family. For some reason it didn't go through even though I had some
> positive feedback. Now it seems I'm encouraged to really define the
> pr_err() for the fifth time...  Not quite sure what to do...

I normally troll the lkml list for patches like this and will sweep them
up.  But I'm presently 1400 messages in arrears so there is some latency.

I'll go grab this patch.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists