[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080214185003.9ca9a640.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:50:03 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: jeff@...zik.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
jengelh@...putergmbh.de, matthew@....cx, randy.dunlap@...cle.com,
daniel.ritz-ml@...ssonline.ch, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] printk: implement printk_header() and merging
printk, take #3
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:36:12 +0900 Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> printk is a special case, I think. It's the primary logging/debugging
> >>> method which can't fail and as it's mostly interpreted by human beings
> >>> (and developers in problematic cases), it has different maneuvering room
> >>> on errors - ie. it's far better to print messages w/o header or proper
> >>> log level than failing to print, which is quite different requirements
> >>> from other components.
> >> Andrew, any more comments or suggestions on how to proceed on this?
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> >> One
> >> way or the other, I think this is a problem worth solving.
> >
> > There are a lot of such problems ;)
>
> So, I guess it's NACK w/o suggested alternatives, right?
>
I wouldn't nack without good reasons, and I have none here. I don't have
very strong opinions either way.
As a seat-of-the-pants thing, it does seem to be a lot of core code to
solve a fairly minor problem in (afaik) one remote place. But I haven't
looked - perhaps there are other places which could be improved if such
facilities were available.
--
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