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

* Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> 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.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-20 18:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans