Re: [PATCH 1/3] rbtree_test: use pr_info for module prefix inmessages

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 10:29 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > This provides nicer message output. Since it seems more appropriate
> > for the nature of this module, also use KERN_INFO instead of other
> > levels.
> 
> Why are you changing the ALERTs to INFO?

Because of the nature of the messages. They don't justify having a
KERN_ALERT level (requiring immediate attention), and it seems a lot
more suitable to use INFO instead.

> 
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  lib/rbtree_test.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/rbtree_test.c b/lib/rbtree_test.c
> > index af38aed..66ca26d 100644
> > --- a/lib/rbtree_test.c
> > +++ b/lib/rbtree_test.c
> > @@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
> > +#define KMSG_COMPONENT "rbtree_test"
> > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KMSG_COMPONENT ": " fmt
> > +
> >  #include <linux/module.h>
> >  #include <linux/rbtree_augmented.h>
> >  #include <linux/random.h>
> > @@ -153,7 +156,7 @@ static int rbtree_test_init(void)
> >         int i, j;
> >         cycles_t time1, time2, time;
> >
> > -       printk(KERN_ALERT "rbtree testing");
> > +       pr_info("rbtree testing");
> 
> This is changing the output from KERN_ALERT to KERN_INFO. Why is this
> necessary? Should this be pr_alert() instead?
> 
> 
> >
> >         prandom_seed_state(&rnd, 3141592653589793238ULL);
> >         init();
> > @@ -171,7 +174,7 @@ static int rbtree_test_init(void)
> >         time = time2 - time1;
> >
> >         time = div_u64(time, PERF_LOOPS);
> > -       printk(" -> %llu cycles\n", (unsigned long long)time);
> > +       pr_info(" -> %llu cycles\n", (unsigned long long)time);
> >
> >         for (i = 0; i < CHECK_LOOPS; i++) {
> >                 init();
> > @@ -186,7 +189,7 @@ static int rbtree_test_init(void)
> >                 check(0);
> >         }
> >
> > -       printk(KERN_ALERT "augmented rbtree testing");
> > +       pr_info("augmented rbtree testing");
> 
> This is changing the output from KERN_ALERT to KERN_INFO. Why is this
> necessary? Should this be pr_alert() instead?
> 
> >
> >         init();
> >
> > @@ -203,7 +206,7 @@ static int rbtree_test_init(void)
> >         time = time2 - time1;
> >
> >         time = div_u64(time, PERF_LOOPS);
> > -       printk(" -> %llu cycles\n", (unsigned long long)time);
> > +       pr_info(" -> %llu cycles\n", (unsigned long long)time);
> >
> >         for (i = 0; i < CHECK_LOOPS; i++) {
> >                 init();
> > @@ -223,7 +226,7 @@ static int rbtree_test_init(void)
> >
> >  static void rbtree_test_exit(void)
> >  {
> > -       printk(KERN_ALERT "test exit\n");
> > +       pr_info("test exit\n");
> 
> This is changing the output from KERN_ALERT to KERN_INFO. Why is this
> necessary? Should this be pr_alert() instead?
> 
> >  }
> >
> >  module_init(rbtree_test_init)
> > --
> > 1.7.11.7
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/