[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: sched: restore sanity

    * Joe Perches <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 16:19 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 07:05 -0800, San Mehat wrote:
    > > > >> Probably, but the rest is just as annoying, pr_* is crap.
    > > > Oh? Out of curiosity whats wrong with it?
    > > That's what should be asked of printk().
    > pr_<level> offers some things printk cannot:
    > o standardization, eliminates frequent missing KERN_ levels
    > and missing/typo/misspelled module prefixes
    > o visually shorter, fewer chars used, less 80 char wrapping
    > o finer grained ability to eliminate unnecessary messages
    > for embedded systems
    > o standardized mechanism to prefix messages with module/function
    > o eventual code reduction via use of a singleton instead of
    > duplicated module/function names
    > o eventual dynamic_debug styled control of prefix by
    > module/function

    These are pretty marginal advantages - borderline not worth the resulting
    churn. But borderline good patch is still a good patch in my book so i applied
    it. Btw., i wish you mixed with real kernel code too instead of going down the
    Bunk path. That would reduce such friction substantially IMO - people would
    see that you are willing to do (and capable of doing) the harder stuff too.



     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-20 18:41    [W:0.022 / U:40.712 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site