On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 8/26/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Joe Perches wrote: > > > Corrected printk calls with multiple output lines which > > > did not correctly preface each line with KERN_<level> > > > > > > Fixed uses of some single lines with too many KERN_<level> > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/ecard.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/ecard.c > > > @@ -547,7 +547,8 @@ static void ecard_check_lockup(struct irq_desc *desc) > > > if (last == jiffies) { > > > lockup += 1; > > > if (lockup > 1000000) { > > > - printk(KERN_ERR "\nInterrupt lockup detected - " > > > + printk(KERN_ERR "\n" > > > + KERN_ERR "Interrupt lockup detected - " > > > "disabling all expansion card interrupts\n"); > > > > > > desc->chip->mask(IRQ_EXPANSIONCARD); > > > > What's the purpose of having lines printed with e.g. `KERN_ERR "\n"' only? > > Shouldn't these just be removed? > > > > Usually lines starting with `\n' are continuations, but given some other > > module may call printk() in between, there's no guarantee continuations > > appear on the same line. > > erm, i thought the prink lock was grabbed per-buffer, not per-line ... > so yes, if the function calls were like printk(KERN_ERR "\n"); > printk(KERN_ERR "..."); things could be broken up, but this is on > function call, so it shouldnt ... Yes it is. What I mean is that probably there used to be a printk() call starting with `\n'. Then someone added a `KERN_ERR' in front of it. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html