Re: [PATCH 00/32] Kill pr_warning in the whole linux code

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 21:29 +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> On 2019/10/17 21:05, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Tue 2019-10-08 14:39:32, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > On 2019/10/2 16:55, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > > On Fri 2019-09-20 14:25:12, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > > > There are pr_warning and pr_warng to show WARNING level message,
> > > > > most of the code using pr_warn, number based on next-20190919,
> > > > > 
> > > > > pr_warn: 5189   pr_warning: 546 (tools: 398, others: 148)
> > > > 
> > > > The ratio is 10:1 in favor of pr_warn(). It would make sense
> > > > to remove the pr_warning().
> > > > 
> > > > Would you accept pull request with these 32 simple patches
> > > > for rc2, please?
> > > > 
> > > > Alternative is to run a simple sed. But it is not trivial
> > > > to fix indentation of the related lines.
> > > 
> > > Kindly ping, should I respin patches with comments fixed?
> > > Is the patchset acceptable, hope to be clear that what to do next :)
> > 
> > I am going to check how many conflicts appeared in linux-next.
> > 
> > If there are only few then I'll take it via printk.git. This way
> > we get proper indentation and other changes.
[]
> For tools parts(api/bpf/perf, patch [29-31]), it renames pr_warning
> to pr_warn, and make manually changes in some place, simply 'sed'
> maybe not enough.

Perhaps tools/ should not be changed.

Last time I did this, I did not convert tools/ as there are
possible external dependencies and code like pr_warning_wrapper
exists and that adds some complexity to the change.

https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/cover/761816/