Re: [PATCH] mm/memory_failure: Let the compiler add the functionname

[David Rientjes]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Borislav Petkov wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 56080ea36140..7d78d5ec61a7 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -1384,16 +1384,16 @@ static int get_any_page(struct page *p, unsigned long pfn, int flags)
>  	 */
>  	if (!get_page_unless_zero(compound_head(p))) {
>  		if (PageHuge(p)) {
> -			pr_info("get_any_page: %#lx free huge page\n", pfn);
> +			pr_info("%s: %#lx free huge page\n", __func__, pfn);
>  			ret = dequeue_hwpoisoned_huge_page(compound_head(p));
>  		} else if (is_free_buddy_page(p)) {
> -			pr_info("get_any_page: %#lx free buddy page\n", pfn);
> +			pr_info("%s: %#lx free buddy page\n", __func__, pfn);
>  			/* Set hwpoison bit while page is still isolated */
>  			SetPageHWPoison(p);
>  			ret = 0;
>  		} else {
> -			pr_info("get_any_page: %#lx: unknown zero refcount page type %lx\n",
> -				pfn, p->flags);
> +			pr_info("%s: %#lx: unknown zero refcount page type %lx\n",
> +				__func__, pfn, p->flags);
>  			ret = -EIO;
>  		}
>  	} else {

I agree with your change, but I'm not sure these should be pr_info() to 
start with, these seem more like debugging messages?  I can't see how 
they'd be useful in standard operation so could we just convert them to be 
debug instead?
--
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/