From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 08:47:49 +0800
Subject: workqueue: Use pr_warn instead of pr_warning
Patch-mainline: v5.5-rc2
Git-commit: 1d9a6159bd04b676cb7d9b13245888fa450cec10
References: bsc#1162702

Use pr_warn() instead of the remaining pr_warning() calls.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191128004752.35268-2-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com
To: joe@perches.com
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: tj@kernel.org
Cc: arnd@arndb.de
Cc: sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
---
 kernel/workqueue.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -4365,8 +4365,8 @@ void destroy_workqueue(struct workqueue_
 	for_each_pwq(pwq, wq) {
 		spin_lock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
 		if (WARN_ON(pwq_busy(pwq))) {
-			pr_warning("%s: %s has the following busy pwq (refcnt=%d)\n",
-				   __func__, wq->name, pwq->refcnt);
+			pr_warn("%s: %s has the following busy pwq\n",
+				__func__, wq->name);
 			show_pwq(pwq);
 			spin_unlock_irq(&pwq->pool->lock);
 			mutex_unlock(&wq->mutex);