On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 09:04:57AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Thu 2019-10-17 21:24:19, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:18:48AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > > For kernel logging macro, pr_warning is completely removed and > > > replaced by pr_warn, using pr_warn in tools lib bpf for symmetry > > > to kernel logging macro, then we could drop pr_warning in the > > > whole linux code. > > > > > > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx> > > > Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> > > > Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> > > > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > tools/lib/bpf/btf.c | 56 +-- > > > tools/lib/bpf/btf_dump.c | 18 +- > > > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 679 ++++++++++++++++---------------- > > > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 8 +- > > > tools/lib/bpf/xsk.c | 4 +- > > > 5 files changed, 379 insertions(+), 386 deletions(-) > > > > Nack. > > I prefer this type of renaming to go via bpf tree. > > It's not a kernel patch. It's touching user space library > > which is under heavy development. > > Doing any other way will cause a ton of conflicts. > > Fair enough. I'll ignore this patch. Could I assume that it will > be taken via bpf tree, please? > > I'll also postpone the patch that removes pr_warning() to avoid > synchronization problems. I'll push it later when changes in > bpf[*] subsystem are merged. > > [*] I am going to check conflicts against 5.4-rc1. I'll probably > ask more subsystems to take their changes to avoid conflicts > and make it smooth. The stand-alone patch as-is currently doesn't apply to bpf-next. Could you spin a fresh rebase and resubmit? Thanks, Daniel
