Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 6 Nov 2018 06:36:04 -0500
From:   YU Bo <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kobject: to use pr_warn replace KERN_WARNING
Message-ID: <20181106113603.ydi6xyrwe23zykfm@yubo-2>
Mail-Followup-To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1541472103-6212-1-git-send-email-tsu.yubo@gmail.com>
 <CAJZ5v0gzM+_a+HJa_kjpgaj96iiH3f_x1ZXjK3HE8=E5FvuAPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <932e46a701ebe9b3b33a110d187880eda14c23fb.camel@perches.com>
 <CAJZ5v0ha=+g2bCr+0Xf47bh-fr66woJfhubd7guc-Dr-xC9x1g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0ha=+g2bCr+0Xf47bh-fr66woJfhubd7guc-Dr-xC9x1g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180512-62-03f98a
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 09:09:15AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 8:58 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 08:49 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:42 AM Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Fix warning form checkpatch, use pr_warn replace KERN_WARNING
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > First off, IMO, you should not change the existing code just in order
>> > to make checkpatch happy about it.  That alone is not a good enough
>> > reason for modifying it.
>> >
>> > If the checkpatch warning indicates an issue like broken white space
>> > (and I mean really broken and not lines longer than 80 chars etc),
>> > then that may be a reason to modify the existing code, depending.
>>
>> Existing code is slightly broken.
>> There is currently a missing terminating newline in the
>> non-switch case match, when msg == NULL;
>
>OK, so this should be explained in the patch changelog.
>
>Saying "I do this to make checkpatch happy" in the changelog is just
>not enough IMO (if not outright misleading).
Using pr_* code become more and more in kernel when i read code and then i ask
for help from checkpatch. In commit log i just copy the what to to but not my
explations that why to do such.
I will send V3, thanks.