lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] drivers/hwmon: Use pr_fmt and pr_<level>
    On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:35:44 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
    > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:02:42PM -0400, Joe Perches wrote:
    > > On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 10:48 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
    > > > The modified define in kernel.org would only apply if pr_fmt isn't already defined,
    > > > so that argument is not really correct. The real difference would be that you could
    > > > then remove the individual pr_fmt defines from 211 files, and all users of pr_fmt
    > > > without module name (ie those hard to read) would be easier to read/identify.
    > >
    > > I think that's not a good idea for now,
    > > though I agree with the general concept.
    > >
    > > This is in kernel.h now.
    > >
    > > #ifndef pr_fmt
    > > #define pr_fmt(fmt) fmt
    > > #endif
    > >
    > > A lot of the pr_<level> calls already include
    > > some internal prefix.
    > >
    > > Try:
    > > $ grep -rP --include=*.[ch] -oh "\bpr_\w+\s*\(\s*\"\w+:" * | \
    > > cut -f2- -d"(" | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
    > >
    > > You're suggesting modifying 100+ files to get the
    > > same output used now.
    > >
    > Yes, plus another 200+ files to remove the then-unnecessary existing pr_fmt defines.

    We're set to change a lot of files anyway, so we might as well do the
    right thing now and be done with it.

    > > I think doing something like this after some more
    > > generally accepted agreement is reached on how best
    > > to do it would be better.
    > >
    > Sounds like the ~400 definitions of TRUE and FALSE in the code base I am working with here.
    >
    > My take is that the time to reach such an agreement is now, to avoid cluttering more code
    > with pr_fmt defines. The longer we wait, the more difficult it will get to reach an agreement,
    > since more and more subsystems will be affected.
    >
    > Personally, I think the pr_fmt cleanup should be more important than replacing printk
    > with pr_<level>. But I'll defer to Jean's judgement on this one, and follow his lead.

    I totally agree with you, Guenter. My initial reaction (which I did
    post!) was exactly the same as yours. Adding a define for pr_fmt to all
    drivers in the kernel tree is simply insane. If the default definition
    of pr_fmt is not good enough, let's just make it better. Now. The whole
    point of pr_*() and dev_*() message printing functions is to have
    standard message formats common to all drivers across the tree. Not
    providing a sane default value for pr_fmt goes against this goal.

    As far as I can see, the only issue with defaulting to 'KBUILD_BASENAME
    ": " fmt' is that some drivers which include a hard-coded prefix in log
    message will now have a redundant prefix. Should be easy enough to spot
    and fix, right?

    I would even go one step further and claim that making pr_fmt
    configurable per driver is pointless. But this can be discussed
    separately/later.

    --
    Jean Delvare


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-10-20 22:01    [W:2.715 / U:0.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site