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

    And as long as we're not going to depricate printk() -- any attempt
    thereof will meet with fierce resistance from yours truly -- its all a
    futile exercise at best, and breaking scripts habits and patches at

    I might be strange, but if I want to print something in C I write
    print[fk]() and be done with it, there's no reason what so ever to
    introduce fancy wankery for this.

    We try to stick to ANSI-C as much as possible, we've got
    kalloc,kfree,strcmp,strnlen and all the other 'regular' C bits,
    deviating from that serves no purpose but seed confusion.

    If driver folks feel the need for dumb-ass wrappers because they can't
    write printk() then maybe, otoh if they can't do that, then wtf are they
    doing writing drivers anyway.

    But I feel this has no place in the core kernel at all, esp when its
    getting in the way of things without offering a single benefit.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-20 16:23    [W:0.021 / U:1.324 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site