Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:37:27 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: 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
| |