Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk

[Petr Mladek]

On Wed 2019-08-28 18:49:29, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (08/28/19 02:31), Brendan Higgins wrote:
> [..]
> > Previously KUnit assumed that printk would always be present, which is
> > not a valid assumption to make. Fix that by removing call to
> > vprintk_emit, and calling printk directly.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/0352fae9-564f-4a97-715a-fabe016259df@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> > Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> [..]
> 
> > -static void kunit_vprintk(const struct kunit *test,
> > -			  const char *level,
> > -			  struct va_format *vaf)
> > -{
> > -	kunit_printk_emit(level[1] - '0', "\t# %s: %pV", test->name, vaf);
> > -}
> 
> This patch looks good to me. I like the removal of recursive
> vsprintf() (%pV).

Same here. And I am happy that we did not add more external
vprintk_emit() callers. It would be great to rework dev_printk()
as well.

Best Regards,
Petr