Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:44:57 -0700 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET] printk: implement printk_header() and merging printk |
| |
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:41:08PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 10:00 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > > And mprintk the following. > > > > code: > > DEFINE_MPRINTK(mp, 2 * 80); > > > > mprintk_set_header(&mp, KERN_INFO "ata%u.%2u: ", 1, 0); > > mprintk_push(&mp, "ATA %d", 7); > > mprintk_push(&mp, ", %u sectors\n", 1024); > > mprintk(&mp, "everything seems dandy\n"); > > I prefer Matthew Wilcox's stringbuf approach which does proper memory > management and isn't specific to printk: > > http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0710.3/0517.html
Do you have any strong feelings whether we should merge my stringbufs or rusty's version? I have no particular preference.
-- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."
| |