From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: replace u64 with phys_addr_t where appropriate
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 18:43:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180704094344.GD458@jagdpanzerIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180704092042.GC458@jagdpanzerIV>
On (07/04/18 18:20), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > There's this saying about habits made to be broken.
> > This is one of those habits.
> >
> > I'd expect more people probably get the %pS or %ps wrong
> > than use %pF.
> >
> > And most people probably look for examples in code and
> > copy instead of thinking what's correct, so removing old
> > and deprecated uses from existing code is a good thing.
>
> Well, I don't NACK the patch, I just want to keep pf/pF in vsprintf(),
> that's it. Yes, checkpatch warns about pf/pF uses, becuase we don't want
> any new pf/pF in the code - it's rather confusing to have both pf/pF and
> ps/pS -- but I don't necessarily see why would we want to mess up with
> parisc/hppa/ia64 people using pf/pF for debugging purposes, etc. I'm not
> married to pf/pF, if you guys insist on complete removal of pf/pF then so
> be it.
And just for the record - I think the reason why I didn't feel like
doing a tree wide pf->ps conversion was that some of those pf->ps
printk-s could end up in -stable backports [sure, no one backports
print out changes, but a print out can be part of a fix which gets
backported, etc]. So I just decided to stay away from this. IIRC.
-ss
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-04 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-03 17:05 [PATCH] mm/memblock: replace u64 with phys_addr_t where appropriate Mike Rapoport
2018-07-03 17:22 ` Pavel Tatashin
2018-07-03 19:57 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-03 20:24 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-04 7:03 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 7:23 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-07-04 9:04 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-04 9:20 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-07-04 9:43 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2018-07-04 15:20 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 7:54 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2018-07-04 15:21 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 17:22 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-05 7:12 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 7:02 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 13:05 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-04 13:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2018-07-04 13:29 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-04 14:04 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180704094344.GD458@jagdpanzerIV \
--to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).