On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:29 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 8/27/19 2:05 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20190826: > > > > on i386: > # CONFIG_PRINTK is not set > > > ../kunit/test.c: In function ‘kunit_vprintk_emit’: > ../kunit/test.c:21:9: error: implicit declaration of function ‘vprintk_emit’; did you mean ‘vprintk’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > return vprintk_emit(0, level, NULL, 0, fmt, args); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > vprintk Ooops, it never occurred to me to test the situation where I wouldn't be able to see test results :-) It seems to me that the right thing to do here is to do what dev_printk and friends do and to ifdef this out if CONFIG_PRINTK is unavailable. Does that seem reasonable? Also, do you want me to resend my patches with the fix or do you want me to send a new patch with this fix? (Sorry for the newbie question.) Thanks!
