Hi Julien, > On 11 Mar 2021, at 11:12, Julien Grall <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Bertrand, > > On 09/03/2021 14:41, Bertrand Marquis wrote: >>> On 9 Mar 2021, at 12:04, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 08.03.2021 20:48, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 08/03/2021 17:18, Bertrand Marquis wrote: >>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c >>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/smpboot.c >>>>> @@ -321,7 +321,8 @@ void start_secondary(void) >>>>> if ( !opt_hmp_unsafe && >>>>> current_cpu_data.midr.bits != boot_cpu_data.midr.bits ) >>>>> { >>>>> - printk(XENLOG_ERR "CPU%u MIDR (0x%x) does not match boot CPU >>>>> MIDR (0x%x),\n" >>>>> + printk(XENLOG_ERR "CPU%u MIDR (0x%"PRIregister") does not match >>>>> boot " >>>>> + "CPU MIDR (0x%"PRIregister"),\n" >>>> >>>> For printk messages, we don't tend to split it like that (even for more >>>> than 80 characters one). Instead, the preferred approach is: >>>> >>>> printk(XENLOG_ERR >>>> "line 1\n" >>>> "line 2\n") >>> >>> Except of course you want to repeat XENLOG_ERR for the 2nd line. > > Interesting, I always thought a single XENLOG_* was enough for multi-line in > the same printk. > >> Very right. >> @Julien: feel free to tell me if you want a v2. > > I would prefer if you resend a v2.
Sure i will do that. Cheers Bertrand > > Cheers, > > -- > Julien Grall
