Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753819AbeABPQl (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:16:41 -0500 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:37224 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751332AbeABPQh (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:16:37 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,497,1508796000"; d="scan'208";a="307408451" Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:16:30 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Bart Van Assche cc: "rpeterso@redhat.com" , "julia.lawall@lip6.fr" , "kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "jolsa@redhat.com" , "linux-media@vger.kernel.org" , "amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" , "namhyung@kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "esc.storagedev@microsemi.com" , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , "alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com" , "dev@openvswitch.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "dccp@vger.kernel.org" , "cluster-devel@redhat.com" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 00/12] drop unneeded newline In-Reply-To: <1514905900.4242.4.camel@wdc.com> Message-ID: References: <1514386305-7402-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <1878806802.2632123.1514901158666.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <1019862289.2632779.1514901387442.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <1514905900.4242.4.camel@wdc.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 15:00 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, Bob Peterson wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > Still, the GFS2 and DLM code has a plethora of broken-up printk messages, > > > and I don't like the thought of re-combining them all. > > > > Actually, the point of the patch was to remove the unnecessary \n at the > > end of the string, because log_print will add another one. If you prefer > > to keep the string broken up, I can resend the patch in that form, but > > without the unnecessary \n. > > Please combine any user-visible strings into a single line for which the > unneeded newline is dropped since these strings are modified anyway by > your patch. That is what the submitted patch (2/12 specifically) did. julia