kernel/trace: Replace printk and WARN_ON by WARN

[PATCH -next] kernel/trace: Replace printk and WARN_ON by WARN

Posted by Hongbo Li 1 year, 5 months ago

Use WARN instead of printk + WARN_ON as reported from coccinelle:
  SUGGESTION: printk + WARN_ON can be just WARN
Let's fix it and simplify the code.

Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
---
 kernel/trace/trace.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
index 833e7d654325..5f385c55499f 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
@@ -2138,9 +2138,7 @@ static int run_tracer_selftest(struct tracer *type)
 	/* the test is responsible for resetting too */
 	tr->current_trace = saved_tracer;
 	if (ret) {
-		printk(KERN_CONT "FAILED!\n");
-		/* Add the warning after printing 'FAILED' */
-		WARN_ON(1);
+		WARN(1, "FAILED!\n");
 		return -1;
 	}
 	/* Only reset on passing, to avoid touching corrupted buffers */
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH -next] kernel/trace: Replace printk and WARN_ON by WARN

Posted by Steven Rostedt 1 year, 5 months ago

On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 17:18:03 +0800
Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com> wrote:

> Use WARN instead of printk + WARN_ON as reported from coccinelle:
>   SUGGESTION: printk + WARN_ON can be just WARN
> Let's fix it and simplify the code.

Following the advice of robots causes the brain to stop functioning.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
> ---
>  kernel/trace/trace.c | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> index 833e7d654325..5f385c55499f 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> @@ -2138,9 +2138,7 @@ static int run_tracer_selftest(struct tracer *type)
>  	/* the test is responsible for resetting too */
>  	tr->current_trace = saved_tracer;
>  	if (ret) {
> -		printk(KERN_CONT "FAILED!\n");
> -		/* Add the warning after printing 'FAILED' */
> -		WARN_ON(1);
> +		WARN(1, "FAILED!\n");

You completely IGNORED and then REMOVED the comment!!!!

Notice that it's not even a KERN_WARN, it's a KERN_CONT.

BIG NACK!

-- Steve

>  		return -1;
>  	}
>  	/* Only reset on passing, to avoid touching corrupted buffers */