On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:44:26 +0000 Xu Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Use WARN(1,...) rather than printk followed by WARN_ON(1). Why? > > Signed-off-by: Xu Wang <[email protected]> > --- > kernel/trace/trace.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c > index 526fd5ac2ba8..a556b8c00a9f 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c > @@ -1957,7 +1957,7 @@ static int run_tracer_selftest(struct tracer *type) > tr->current_trace = saved_tracer; > if (ret) { > /* Add the warning after printing 'FAILED' */ > - WARN(1, KERN_CONT "FAILED!\n"); > + WARN(1, "FAILED!\n"); The above isn't even in my tree. Anyway, look at the code around it, and then tell that this patch makes sense. NAK. -- Steve > return -1; > } > /* Only reset on passing, to avoid touching corrupted buffers */
