[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070613175147.GB14355@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:51:47 -0700
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To: holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, randy.dunlap@...cle.com,
akpm@...l.org, mtk-manpages@....net, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Documentation of kernel messages
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 05:06:57PM +0200, holzheu wrote:
> Current prototype implementation:
> =================================
>
> The structure of a kernel message is: <component>.<msg number>: <msg>
>
> * component: Name of the kernel or driver component e.g. "pci", "ide",
> etc.
> * msg number: Within the component unique number of a kernel message.
> * msg: printk message
>
> New macros KMSG_ERR(), KMSG_WARN(), etc. are defined, which have to be
> used in printk. These macros have as parameter the message number and
> are using a per c-file defined macro KMSG_COMPONENT.
>
> Example: Define message 2 in component "kmsgtest":
>
> #define KMSG_COMPONENT "kmsgtest"
>
> void f(void)
> {
> printk(KMSG_ERR(1) "device %x not online\n", devno);
> }
Ick, why are you ignoring what we have already with dev_printk() and
friends? We are just finally getting developers to use that, I think it
will be almost impossible to get people to change to something else,
especially one that isn't even as "correct" as what dev_printk() offers
you today, will be quite hard.
So, why not use what we already have and work off of it?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists