From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965866AbeEIRWw (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 13:22:52 -0400 Received: from mail-ot0-f193.google.com ([74.125.82.193]:34633 "EHLO mail-ot0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935153AbeEIRWu (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 13:22:50 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZpTLWDEv0ZAq5tFXx/C0PJllP8vScrOFdMEE+cDliYIvLKhWsNKbrXPY9qqK49881uq5XpYQg== Reply-To: minyard@acm.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] treewide: Add and use dev_fmt similar to pr_fmt To: Joe Perches , openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman References: <4a397208-bd6c-a6c3-c161-4de8579ca17e@gmail.com> From: Corey Minyard Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 12:22:46 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/09/2018 12:04 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 11:47 -0500, Corey Minyard wrote: >> On 05/09/2018 10:15 AM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> The pr_fmt mechanism exists for pr_ logging message prefixing, >>> but no similar capability exists for dev_ message prefixing. >>> >>> Many uses of dev_ have an embedded prefix for logging output. >>> >>> So add a similar dev_fmt macro that can automatically prefix the >>> dev_ logging output. >>> >>> Rename the existing dev_ functions to _dev_ and add new >>> macros that call _dev_ with the desired prefix if defined. >>> >>> The new default #define for dev_fmt is blank. >>> >>> Convert ipmi and infiniband to use this mechanism. >> The IPMI changes look good to me. > Oh good. > >> There are some conflicts with a patch I have pulling out the proc >> interface that is destined for 3.18. > I'm sure you mean 4.18. Oops, yes :).  I was just looking at a 3.x kernel and it stuck in my brain. >> I can take the IPMI changes into my tree, if you want. > These patches are not at all urgent and were done > on top of next-20180509. > > As there are dependencies between the patch that > introduces dev_fmt and the reset of the patches, > I think it makes sense to take these as a single > patchset rather than take parts into various trees. The dependency isn't hard, the changes work without dev_fmt, it just won't print the prefix.  But I'm fine with you keeping them. > > Respinning the IPMI patches is trivial and can be > done whenever appropriate. > > When do you expect your IPMI patches to hit -next? > I went ahead and pulled it in now, it's been tested well enough in my tree. For patches 3, 4, and 5: Acked-by: Corey Minyard