[PATCH 00/35] treewide trivial patches converting pr_warning to pr_warn
emil.l.velikov at gmail.com
Thu Feb 23 17:41:20 UTC 2017
On 23 February 2017 at 17:18, Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 09:28 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:11 AM, Joe Perches <joe at perches.com> wrote:
>> > There are ~4300 uses of pr_warn and ~250 uses of the older
>> > pr_warning in the kernel source tree.
>> > Make the use of pr_warn consistent across all kernel files.
>> > This excludes all files in tools/ as there is a separate
>> > define pr_warning for that directory tree and pr_warn is
>> > not used in tools/.
>> > Done with 'sed s/\bpr_warning\b/pr_warn/' and some emacsing.
>> Where's the removal of pr_warning so we don't have more sneak in?
> After all of these actually get applied,
> and maybe a cycle or two later, one would
> get sent.
By which point you'll get a few reincarnation of it. So you'll have to
do the same exercise again :-(
I guess the question is - are you expecting to get the series merged
all together/via one tree ? If not, your plan is perfectly reasonable.
Fwiw in the DRM subsystem, similar cleanups does purge the respective
macros/other with the final commit. But there one can pull the lot in
More information about the amd-gfx