Hi Geert,
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 02:37:18PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:25 PM Sakari Ailus
> <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The printk family of functions supports %ps and %pS conversion specifiers
> > to print function names. Yet the deprecated %pf and %pF conversion
> > specifiers with equivalent functionality remain supported. A number of
> > users of %pf and %pF remain.
> >
> > This patchsets converts the existing users of %pf and %pF to %ps and %pS,
> > respectively, and removes support for the deprecated %pf and %pF.
> >
> > The patches apply cleanly both on 5.1-rc1 as well as on Linux-next. No new
> > %pf or %pF users have been added in the meantime so the patch is
> > sufficient as itself on linux-next, too.
>
> Do you know in which commit they became deprecated, so the backporters
> know how far this can be backported safely?
That appears to be 04b8eb7a4ccd
("symbol lookup: introduce dereference_symbol_descriptor()"), the same
patch that made %p[fF] and %p[sS] functionally equivalent.
But my personal opinion would be not to backport the patch for two reasons:
the sheer number of files it touches (those format strings change for
various reasons) and the meager benefits it has on older kernels as any
backported patch using %s or %S still works as such. Porting a patch
forward should have no issues either as checkpatch.pl has been complaining
of the use of %pf and %pF for a while now.
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
