On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:38 AM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > +torvalds > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 04:57:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 10:15 AM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Functions, like pr_err, are a more modern variant of printing compared to > > > printk. They could be used to denoise sources by using needed level in > > > the print function name, and by automatically inserting per-driver / > > > function / ... print prefix as defined by pr_fmt macro. pr_* are also > > > said to be used in Documentation/process/coding-style.rst and more > > > recent code - for example overlayfs - uses them instead of printk. > > > > > > Convert CUSE and FUSE to use the new pr_* functions. > > > > > > CUSE output stays completely unchanged, while FUSE output is amended a > > > bit for "trying to steal weird page" warning - the second line now comes > > > also with "fuse:" prefix. I hope it is ok. > > > > Yep. Applied, thanks. > > Miklos, thanks for feedback. Could you please clarify where the patch is > applied? Here is what linux/MAINTAINERS says > > FUSE: FILESYSTEM IN USERSPACE > M: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> > L: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > W: http://fuse.sourceforge.net/ > T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/fuse.git > S: Maintained > F: fs/fuse/ > F: include/uapi/linux/fuse.h > F: Documentation/filesystems/fuse.txt > > but git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/fuse.git was > not updated for ~ 2 months. I see other "Applied, thanks" replies from > you on linux-fsdevel in recent days and it suggests that patches are > indeed applied, but where they are integrated is the question. My private patch queue. > Linux-next also has no post-5.1 fuse patches at all, so I'm really > puzzled about what is going on. > > Is there any reason not to keep for-next fuse branch publicly available? > Or am I missing something? I usually push to fuse.git#for-next within a day or two of adding it to my queue. > Could you please also have a look at other posted patches? I'm > struggling for months sending them to you and not getting feedback. It > is kind of frustrating to work in this mode. I see. I'll try to give more frequent feedback on patches. The reason for not replying is not that I intentionally ignore incoming patches, but because I'm working on something else and context switching between completely different projects is not easy for me. Thanks, Miklos
