| Message ID | 61817479ac8c4c6c8be702d2e2136fddac1b1821.1493228290.git.joe@perches.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:39:49 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > Previous: > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > New: > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > [ 102.669036] PC is at hso_start_net_device+0x50/0xc0 [hso] [ 102.674835] LR is at hso_net_open+0x68/0x84 [hso] [ 102.679809] pc : [<bf785304>] lr : [<bf785ed8>] psr: a00b0013 [ 102.686462] sp : ed047e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff yes, the kernel oopses in a nicer way. Tested-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> Regards, Andreas Kemnade > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > --- > arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > @@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs) > > print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs)); > print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr); > - printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n" > - "sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", > - regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr, > - regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); > + printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n", > + regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr); > + printk("sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", > + regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); > printk("r10: %08lx r9 : %08lx r8 : %08lx\n", > regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9, > regs->ARM_r8);
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > Previous: > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > New: > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Hi Joe, Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) Thanks. > --- > arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c > @@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs) > > print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs)); > print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr); > - printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n" > - "sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", > - regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr, > - regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); > + printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n", > + regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr); > + printk("sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", > + regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); > printk("r10: %08lx r9 : %08lx r8 : %08lx\n", > regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9, > regs->ARM_r8); > -- > 2.10.0.rc2.1.g053435c >
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > > > Previous: > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > New: > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > > Hi Joe, > > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) > > Thanks. Rehi Russell. Done, and I had to lookup your "my patch system", even though it was in your trailer, the email address of the system wasn't listed until bullet point 8. If you've the time to ask me to do this, it seems likely you could have forwarded the original email to your patch system yourself instead. Also "patches@armlinux.org.uk" isn't mentioned at all in either the documentation or MAINTAINERS. Should it be? btw: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/info.php has many outdated references like: Once the 2.7 kernel opens, support for new features in the 2.6 kernels will not be accepted unless similar support is also available for the 2.7 kernel.
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > > > Previous: > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > New: > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > > Hi Joe, > > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) > > Thanks. Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch because your system wants totally unnecessary additional information specific to your workflow. No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to please your system and neither should anyone else.
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > > > > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > > > > > Previous: > > > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > > > New: > > > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > > > > Hi Joe, > > > > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to > > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) > > > > Thanks. > > Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch > because your system wants totally unnecessary additional > information specific to your workflow. > > No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to > please your system and neither should anyone else. Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then. I've got days of catch up, and I'm just not going to remember. Sorry.
On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 22:30 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and > > > > subsequent lines may not have timestamps. > > > > > > > > Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. > > > > This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. > > > > > > > > Previous: > > > > > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > > > sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > > > > > New: > > > > > > > > [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 > > > > [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > > > > > > Hi Joe, > > > > > > Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to > > > apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch > > because your system wants totally unnecessary additional > > information specific to your workflow. > > > > No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to > > please your system and neither should anyone else. > > Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then. I've got days of > catch up, and I'm just not going to remember. Sorry. <shrug> If your systems require special handling on the part of patch submitters, you should document it in the kernel tree. Better, someone else should find the time to apply properly formatted patches.
On 04/05/17 01:24, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 22:30 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 12:44:11PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 20:23 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:39:49AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >>>>> Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and >>>>> subsequent lines may not have timestamps. >>>>> >>>>> Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. >>>>> This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. >>>>> >>>>> Previous: >>>>> >>>>> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 >>>>> sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff >>>>> >>>>> New: >>>>> >>>>> [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 >>>>> [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> >>>> >>>> Hi Joe, >>>> >>>> Could you put this in my patch system please, I'm unlikely to remember to >>>> apply it otherwise if not already there (massive email backlog.) >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>> >>> Your patch system bounced my perfectly formatted patch >>> because your system wants totally unnecessary additional >>> information specific to your workflow. >>> >>> No thanks, I don't need the additional work just to >>> please your system and neither should anyone else. >> >> Don't expect me to remember to apply your patch then. I've got days of >> catch up, and I'm just not going to remember. Sorry. > > <shrug> > > If your systems require special handling on the > part of patch submitters, you should document it > in the kernel tree. > > Better, someone else should find the time to apply > properly formatted patches. > Joe, I find this patch handy, so I've uploaded it into Russell's patch system on your behalf and it has been accepted as patch 8673/1. Cheers Vladimir > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel >
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c index 939e8b58c59d..151cece4a293 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kernel/process.c +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/process.c @@ -123,10 +123,10 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs) print_symbol("PC is at %s\n", instruction_pointer(regs)); print_symbol("LR is at %s\n", regs->ARM_lr); - printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n" - "sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", - regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr, - regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); + printk("pc : [<%08lx>] lr : [<%08lx>] psr: %08lx\n", + regs->ARM_pc, regs->ARM_lr, regs->ARM_cpsr); + printk("sp : %08lx ip : %08lx fp : %08lx\n", + regs->ARM_sp, regs->ARM_ip, regs->ARM_fp); printk("r10: %08lx r9 : %08lx r8 : %08lx\n", regs->ARM_r10, regs->ARM_r9, regs->ARM_r8);
Multiple line formats are not preferred as the second and subsequent lines may not have timestamps. Lacking timestamps makes reading the output a bit difficult. This also makes arm/arm64 output more similar. Previous: [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff New: [ 1514.093231] pc : [<bf79c304>] lr : [<bf79ced8>] psr: a00f0013 [ 1514.105316] sp : ecdd7e20 ip : 00000000 fp : ffffffff Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> --- arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)