On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Sunday 04 November 2012, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > I don't see yet where that KERN_WARNING gets added. Looking at > > > warn_slowpath_common, there are two or three lines that get printed at > > > KERN_WARNING level, followed by the format that got passed into WARN(), > > > which may or may not include a printk level, but I don't see one getting > > > added. > > > > OK, I agree. There are lots of KERN_WARNINGs, but not on the string that > > was passed in. Still, maybe it is not so good to pass a KERN_XXX for some > > other XXX to WARN. > > Given that most users don't pass anything here, and that those that do pass > something are somewhat inconsistent, could we make the messages always get > printed at KERN_WARNING level from WARN(), and kill off the instances > that already pass a level? OK, I could try proposing that, and if someone doesn't think it is the right thing to do, they can ignore the patch. Concretely, KERN_WARNING should be added in the printk called from WARN, and all KERN information should be removed from the calls? thanks, julia -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
