Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 0/7] printk/ia64/ppc64/parisc64: let's deprecate %pF/%pf printk specifiers

Michael,

On (09/27/17 15:01), Michael Ellerman wrote:

Sergey Senozhatsky [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On (09/22/17 16:48), Luck, Tony wrote:
[..]

quoted

Tested patch series on ia64 successfully.

Tested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>

thanks!

quoted

After this goes upstream, you should submit a patch to get rid of
all uses of %pF (70 instances in 35 files) and %pf (63 in 34)

Perhaps break the patch by top-level directory (e.g. get all the %pF
and %pF in the 17 files under drivers/ in one patch).

frankly, I was going to have some sort of a lazy deprecation process:
didn't plan to send out a patch set that would hunt down all pf/pF-s.
hm...

That never works though, we have lots of cruft left over from times when
that's happened and the conversion never quite got finished.

this time around it's different, I promise! :)


well...
I guess I can send out a tree wide pf/pF removal patch set. later.
when we will see that .opd based dereference does not make anyone
unhappy.

and I think we can't remove pf/pF from the kernel completely. it
will stay in vscnprintf() for some time. old habits die hard, I suppose,
there might be people using it for debugging/etc.

At least if you send out the patches to do the removal they might
eventually get merged.

quoted

speaking of upstream, any objections if this patch set will go through
the printk tree, in one piece?

Do you mind putting it in a topic branch (based on rc2) and then merge
that into the printk tree? That way I can merge the topic branch iff
there are conflicts later down the line towards 4.15.

ok, let me re-spin the series. there are some changes here
and there, so I'll drop Tested-by/Reviewed-by tags and will
ask platforms' maintainers to re-test the patch set :(

if everything goes OK, then we can ask Petr to do the topic
branch (I don't have a kernel.org account).

	-ss