This patch fixed the following checkpatch complaint as using pr_*
instead of printk.
WARNING: printk() should include KERN_ facility level
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jungseok Lee <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Sungjinn Chung <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
index 7ffaddd..0484e81 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
fs = get_fs();
set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
- printk("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
+ pr_emerg("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
for (first = bottom & ~31; first < top; first += 32) {
unsigned long p;
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
sprintf(str + i * 9, " ????????");
}
}
- printk("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);
+ pr_emerg("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);
}
set_fs(fs);
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static void dump_instr(const char *lvl, struct pt_regs *regs)
break;
}
}
- printk("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);
+ pr_emerg("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);
set_fs(fs);
}
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ static void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk)
frame.pc = thread_saved_pc(tsk);
}
- printk("Call trace:\n");
+ pr_emerg("Call trace:\n");
while (1) {
unsigned long where = frame.pc;
int ret;
@@ -328,17 +328,17 @@ asmlinkage void bad_mode(struct pt_regs *regs, int reason, unsigned int esr)
void __pte_error(const char *file, int line, unsigned long val)
{
- printk("%s:%d: bad pte %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
+ pr_crit("%s:%d: bad pte %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
}
void __pmd_error(const char *file, int line, unsigned long val)
{
- printk("%s:%d: bad pmd %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
+ pr_crit("%s:%d: bad pmd %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
}
void __pgd_error(const char *file, int line, unsigned long val)
{
- printk("%s:%d: bad pgd %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
+ pr_crit("%s:%d: bad pgd %016lx.\n", file, line, val);
}
void __init trap_init(void)
--
1.7.10.4
On Mon, Apr 28 2014 at 09:59:14 PM, Jungseok Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> This patch fixed the following checkpatch complaint as using pr_*
> instead of printk.
>
> WARNING: printk() should include KERN_ facility level
>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jungseok Lee <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Sungjinn Chung <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> index 7ffaddd..0484e81 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
> fs = get_fs();
> set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
>
> - printk("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
> + pr_emerg("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
Currently this printk is being called with lvl=KERN_EMERG or lvl="". In
the case of lvl=KERN_EMERG leaving lvl in is redundant. In the case of
lvl="" this is a behavioral change (printing to a different log
level). Was this intended?
>
> for (first = bottom & ~31; first < top; first += 32) {
> unsigned long p;
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
> sprintf(str + i * 9, " ????????");
> }
> }
> - printk("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);
> + pr_emerg("%s%04lx:%s\n", lvl, first & 0xffff, str);
Ditto
> }
>
> set_fs(fs);
> @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static void dump_instr(const char *lvl, struct pt_regs *regs)
> break;
> }
> }
> - printk("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);
> + pr_emerg("%sCode: %s\n", lvl, str);
Ditto. Also called with with lvl=KERN_INFO.
Mitch
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 5:35 AM, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28 2014 at 09:59:14 PM, Jungseok Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This patch fixed the following checkpatch complaint as using pr_*
> > instead of printk.
> >
> > WARNING: printk() should include KERN_ facility level
> >
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Jungseok Lee <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Sungjinn Chung <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 14 +++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > index 7ffaddd..0484e81 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ static void dump_mem(const char *lvl, const char *str, unsigned long bottom,
> > fs = get_fs();
> > set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
> >
> > - printk("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
> > + pr_emerg("%s%s(0x%016lx to 0x%016lx)\n", lvl, str, bottom, top);
>
> Currently this printk is being called with lvl=KERN_EMERG or lvl="". In the case of lvl=KERN_EMERG
> leaving lvl in is redundant. In the case of lvl="" this is a behavioral change (printing to a
> different log level). Was this intended?
No intention. I will drop the change in the next version.
Thanks!!
Best Regards
Jungseok Lee