Hello, Ingo.

Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> but i'm not sure i agree with the moving of these variables inside 
> vprintk:
> 
>> -/* cpu currently holding logbuf_lock */
>> -static volatile unsigned int printk_cpu = UINT_MAX;
>> -
>> -const char printk_recursion_bug_msg [] =
>> -			KERN_CRIT "BUG: recent printk recursion!\n";
>> -static int printk_recursion_bug;
>> -
>>  asmlinkage int vprintk(const char *fmt, va_list args)
>>  {
>> +	/* cpu currently holding logbuf_lock */
>> +	static volatile unsigned int printk_cpu = UINT_MAX;
>> +	static const char printk_recursion_bug_msg [] =
>> +		KERN_CRIT "BUG: recent printk recursion!\n";
>> +	static int printk_recursion_bug;
>>  	static int log_level_unknown = 1;
>>  	static char printk_buf[1024];
> 
> it's easy to miss a static variable inside a function local variables 

I find that difficult to agree.  As long as static ones are put above
all local ones, they are visually distinctive enough.  static variables
used by a single function are usually declared in the function all
through the source tree.

quoted text
> block. It would b ebetter to move log_level_unknown and printk_buf 
> _outside_ the function, to the other ones. [and to mark 
> printk_recursion_bug_msg static]

Well, I thought it was an obvious clean up.  Time to split this patch
up, I guess.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/