Received: by 2002:a05:7208:13ce:b0:7f:395a:35b6 with SMTP id r14csp57441rbe; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:00:13 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCViPZ7I4/tJWRx/easYXwvxPoUW6RVl5196uGDaAe2HvWmRlpKk1GEqnfPiWuSjG/uyzU1opXnEF3ex73J4e9yjTpr+q93ti+6R/Z7wRg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHB1EXRzvVJSJr/PbVs/H4cXj03DIfJqo3DRfXFXKRUgOPmZCJI1HY3KHXXn8iljPrY7Ln8 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:e68c:b0:19e:9966:228d with SMTP id mz12-20020a056a20e68c00b0019e9966228dmr339957pzb.20.1709150413469; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:00:13 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from sy.mirrors.kernel.org (sy.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k34-20020a635622000000b005cfd72d0bc7si186851pgb.246.2024.02.28.12.00.12 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-85645-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=GP5azm86; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-85645-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-85645-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sy.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 153A4B25215 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:52:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B5E2200DA; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:52:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="GP5azm86" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2F2F5E070; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709149957; cv=none; b=FqYoc2daqMqdC67FeZTKX/c75qV1KVXOhdbKJeeNqRbjkr80Cyq8JdDPslOyV6N42MrhbMK89VDUAhmLcIfD1AqxSGq9sSALMymG+ZN0YRNqx3RHuBQZHJ6q23pUO2FX8dm5pnEZfLXJUori0VKMlRv9gV3a3e5Rk4iLzk33gX0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709149957; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fjreD3AvpuMZusL/02iZMWGJUUh6uW620cQWuM2ywis=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sxUWTWqO4KeE/bysdAXykGaKyyZRbBQRbeN0K4+/uCd99UhCwqvulPgkuvm5jw86pitALCgTVc8pJGMzhVmShtpLMm2CDA3iOdjG0vKD2CktsMOSkAusstHadJBlEyw7AgINIjwbL0QUmtNJKBOVeLxAuKpzr36fQoGGT6LNdZU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=GP5azm86; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1709149956; x=1740685956; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=fjreD3AvpuMZusL/02iZMWGJUUh6uW620cQWuM2ywis=; b=GP5azm86lwKhjc+rKz8ScGyNfKXHDmg7eHOdVD/+hFxOHCTjzGlEnqgC sUwyTUNg05MKEMgwz4E60qiWAlA3kkjeg01hYP+l5a3NsgWnfBCfrRsTS +422Ozppx6zNg8bVI5/cIloVfFl0qLfldne58ON85LlYd+LzxYapnY2L1 rW/6lBvCDfTIwoHGtWJsF0y6Bs7TNNpATc1LIWlgwTZggL6Wj/KYo07VB IhS2jVS21OPB9e8AMwrEfKYEzhywA9pNFWbX1Me6DKdPA1udQ19WA9/Z0 JS5cDG0K6TjeA0INmCTGBiXA7Ikj2BckUe0ZFxY8uWDwVJrHedjn4L11X w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10998"; a="14217961" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,191,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="14217961" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmvoesa105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Feb 2024 11:52:35 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10998"; a="913959763" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,191,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="913959763" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Feb 2024 11:52:31 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rfPyd-00000008Tvk-3ovK; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 21:52:27 +0200 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 21:52:27 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Chris Down , Petr Mladek , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jessica Yu , Steven Rostedt , John Ogness , Sergey Senozhatsky , Jason Baron , Jim Cromie , Ilya Dryomov , Xiubo Li , Jeff Layton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dev_printk: Add and use dev_no_printk() Message-ID: References: <8583d54f1687c801c6cda8edddf2cf0344c6e883.1709127473.git.geert+renesas@glider.be> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 08:33:19PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 6:39 PM Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:00:03PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: .. > > dev_printk() > > I fully agree. But the surrounding comments don't, so I gave in. Is there any better justification to keep a technical debt? I mean, the comment here can be better than existed ones, if you feel uncomfortable with it, you can fix the rest in a separate patch. Would it be a big deal? :-) -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko