On Thu 13-10-16 02:29:46, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 08:26 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I think they are not critical and can be fix once somebody notices.
> As do I, but Linus objected to applying a patch when Colin Ian King
> noticed one.
> I think the 250,000 or so uses with newlines are enough of a
> precedence to keep using newlines everywhere.

or simply fix missing KERN_CONTs and simply do not add any new missing \n

> Now we'll have to have patches adding hundreds to thousands of the
> missing KERN_CONTs for continuation lines that weren't previously a
> problem in logging output but are now.

I would be really surprised if we really had that many continuation
lines. They should be avoided as much as possible. Hundreds of thousands
just sounds more than over exaggerated...

I think you are just making much bigger deal from this than necessary.
Not requiring \n at the end of strings just makes a lot of sense if we
have a KERN_CONT with a well defined semantic. Which was the whole point
of the patch from Linus AFAIU. If there are some left overs, so what, we
can fix them as soon as somebody notices. The worst thing we will get is
a messy output but no information should be lost. We used to have a
messy output in the past regardless and we could live with it...

That being said I would be happier to know about this change before I
had to scratch my head when seeing this for the first time so a heads up
would be more than appreciated but fixing these issues is trivial not
not worth making a lot of noise about.

Michal Hocko

Reply via email to