On 01/27/2011 05:22 PM, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
> Ryan Mallon (ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>> On 01/27/2011 12:29 PM, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>>> printk()s without a priority level default to KERN_WARNING. To reduce
>>> noise at KERN_WARNING, this patch set the priority level appriopriately
>>> for unleveled printks()s. This should be useful to folks that look at
>>> dmesg warnings closely.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>
>>> @@ -4700,33 +4700,36 @@ void __init free_area_init_nodes(unsigned long *max_zone_pfn)
>>> find_zone_movable_pfns_for_nodes(zone_movable_pfn);
>>>
>>> /* Print out the zone ranges */
>>> - printk("Zone PFN ranges:\n");
>>> + printk(KERN_INFO "Zone PFN ranges:\n");
>>> for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_ZONES; i++) {
>>> if (i == ZONE_MOVABLE)
>>> continue;
>>> - printk(" %-8s ", zone_names[i]);
>>> + printk(KERN_INFO " %-8s ", zone_names[i]);
>>> if (arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn[i] ==
>>> arch_zone_highest_possible_pfn[i])
>>> printk("empty\n");
>>
>> Should be printk(KERN_CONT ... (or pr_cont).
>>
>>> else
>>> - printk("%0#10lx -> %0#10lx\n",
>>> + printk(KERN_INFO "%0#10lx -> %0#10lx\n",
>>> arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn[i],
>>> arch_zone_highest_possible_pfn[i]);
>>
>> The printk above doesn't have a trailing newline so this should be
>> printk(KERN_CONT ...
>>
>> There are a couple of other places in this patch series that also need
>> to be fixed in a similar manner.
>>
>
> D'oh. Good catch;)
>
> The KERN_INFO here was unintentional. I had intended to leave it out.
> The code I was looking at as a reference was just omitting KERN_ for
> continuations. But I take it that the convention is to use KERN_CONT.
> I'll fixup the patch series to use that.
I think in general it is nicer to use KERN_CONT because it explicitly
shows that there is a printk somewhere above with no trailing newline.
Note that include/linux/printk.h has this to say about KERN_CONT:
/*
* Annotation for a "continued" line of log printout (only done after a
* line that had no enclosing \n). Only to be used by core/arch code
* during early bootup (a continued line is not SMP-safe otherwise).
*/
I'm guessing that the above is safe, but if you are fixing printks up
then it would be good to check that places using continued lines are safe.
> I tried to use pr_ wherever the file was already using it or where I was
> changing all printk()s. For files with many printk()s I just continued
> using printk() to keep the patch small and also to avoid mixing printk
> with pr_. However, if it is preferrable, I'm happy to replace all printk()s
> with pr_ in the files I touch in the series.
I'm not sure what the policy on changing printk to the pr_ variants is.
Cc'ed Joe Perches who knows more about such things.
~Ryan
--
Bluewater Systems Ltd - ARM Technology Solution Centre
Ryan Mallon 5 Amuri Park, 404 Barbadoes St
ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PO Box 13 889, Christchurch 8013
http://www.bluewatersys.com New Zealand
Phone: +64 3 3779127 Freecall: Australia 1800 148 751
Fax: +64 3 3779135 USA 1800 261 2934
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
