Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/11] RISC-V: Use common print prefix in smp.c

[Anup Patel]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 7:14 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:38:42 +0100,
> Anup Patel <anup.patel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > We add "#define pr_fmt()" in smp.c to use "riscv:" as common
> > print prefix for all pr_xyz() statements in this file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@xxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c | 9 +++++----
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> > index 547dc508f7d1..eea0c9d11d9f 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >   * Copyright (C) 2017 SiFive
> >   */
> >
> > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "riscv: " fmt
> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >  #include <linux/clockchips.h>
> >  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > @@ -114,7 +115,7 @@ static void send_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, enum ipi_message_type op)
> >       if (ipi_ops && ipi_ops->ipi_inject)
> >               ipi_ops->ipi_inject(mask);
> >       else
> > -             pr_warn("SMP: IPI inject method not available\n");
> > +             pr_warn("IPI inject method not available\n");
> >  }
> >
> >  static void send_ipi_single(int cpu, enum ipi_message_type op)
> > @@ -126,7 +127,7 @@ static void send_ipi_single(int cpu, enum ipi_message_type op)
> >       if (ipi_ops && ipi_ops->ipi_inject)
> >               ipi_ops->ipi_inject(cpumask_of(cpu));
> >       else
> > -             pr_warn("SMP: IPI inject method not available\n");
> > +             pr_warn("IPI inject method not available\n");
>
> "SMP:" made a lot more sense. I assume that the user knows that they
> are using a RISC-V machine. On the other hand, seeing a "SMP:" prefix
> for a message indicates the provenance of the message.
>
> I honestly don't see the point in this change.

The intention was to distinguish arch specific prints from
generic kernel prints at boot-time because "SMP: " prefix
was not making it obvious that these are arch specific prints.

I am certainly fine dropping this patch as well.

Regards,
Anup

>
>         M.
>
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.