Re: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 02/18] lockdep: Make RCU suspicious-access splats use pr_err

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 02:33:19PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:30:16AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:40:23PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 06:53:41PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > This commit switches RCU suspicious-access splats use pr_err()
> > > > instead of the current INFO printk()s.  This change makes it easier
> > > > to automatically classify splats.
> > > > 
> > > > Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 12 ++++++------
> > > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> > > > index 7c38f8f3d97b..a74c0630172a 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> > > > @@ -4412,13 +4412,13 @@ void lockdep_rcu_suspicious(const char *file, const int line, const char *s)
> > > >  #endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_REPEATEDLY */
> > > >  	/* Note: the following can be executed concurrently, so be careful. */
> > > >  	printk("\n");
> > > > -	printk("===============================\n");
> > > > -	printk("[ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]\n");
> > > > +	pr_err("===============================\n");
> > > > +	pr_err("[  suspicious RCU usage.      ]\n");
> > > 
> > > While re-adding the square bracket makes it symmetric, this change still
> > > seems odd, and unrelated to the switch to pr_err.  You could change it
> > > to "ERR:" if you want, if "INFO:" feels inaccurate to you.
> > 
> > So this would be OK?
> > 
> > 	pr_err("[ ERR: suspicious RCU usage.  ]\n");
> > 
> > (Changed to this as a best guess, but please let me know.)
> 
> Yeah, that seems fine.  Sorry to nitpick this; it just otherwise seemed
> entirely unrelated to the rest of the change.

Might as well get it right...  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul