Re: [PATCH 10/10] trace: Replace printk and WARN_ON with WARN

[Jules Irenge]

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 21:23:57 +0000
> Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Coccinelle suggests replacing printk and WARN_ON with WARN
> > 
> > SUGGESTION: printk + WARN_ON can be just WARN.
> > Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  kernel/trace/trace.c | 4 +---
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > index 6b11e4e2150c..1fe31272ea73 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > @@ -1799,9 +1799,7 @@ static int run_tracer_selftest(struct tracer *type)
> >  	/* the test is responsible for resetting too */
> >  	tr->current_trace = saved_tracer;
> >  	if (ret) {
> > -		printk(KERN_CONT "FAILED!\n");
> > -		/* Add the warning after printing 'FAILED' */
> 
> NACK! Did you not read the above comment. The FAILED goes with another
> print and should NOT be part of the WARN_ON.
> 
> -- Steve
> 
> > -		WARN_ON(1);
> > +		WARN(1, "FAILED!\n");
> >  		return -1;
> >  	}
> >  	/* Only reset on passing, to avoid touching corrupted buffers */
> 
> 
Thanks for the feedback, I will be more careful next time.
Kind regards,
Jules