Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:18:22 -0700 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [patch 2/17] Add a WARN() macro that acts like WARN_ON()+printk |
| |
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:00:05 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 09:40 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > +#ifndef WARN > > +#define WARN(condition, format...) > > ({ \ > > + int __ret_warn_on > > = !!(condition); \ > > + if > > (unlikely(__ret_warn_on)) \ > > + > > __WARN_printf(format); \ > > + > > unlikely(__ret_warn_on); \ > > +}) +#endif > > + > > If all current uses of WARN are going to change, perhaps > adding an argument for KERN_<level> or removing the > KERN_<level> prefixes and standardizing on a single > KERN_<level> (KERN_WARNING?) is appropriate.
I looked at this and there are various levels in use today, I don't think we can standardize on one unfortunately. I don't think there's a real problem; WARN() really acts like printk... all the way.
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org
| |