[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKocOOM8WeEgDdk6gkKCxLZFgdX8=+-e2zK0qOGmxxfS2qc4bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:54:13 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <shuahkhan@...il.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rbtree_test: use pr_info for module prefix in messages
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
<davidlohr.bueso@...com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 10:29 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com> wrote:
>> > This provides nicer message output. Since it seems more appropriate
>> > for the nature of this module, also use KERN_INFO instead of other
>> > levels.
>>
>> Why are you changing the ALERTs to INFO?
>
> Because of the nature of the messages. They don't justify having a
> KERN_ALERT level (requiring immediate attention), and it seems a lot
> more suitable to use INFO instead.
>
Hmm. I see interval_tree_test using the same alerts. It almost looks
like the start and end of a test are meant to be alerts. I am not
saying it shouldn't be changed, however looking for a stronger reason
than "it seems a lot more suitable to use INFO instead". Are there any
use-cases in which KERN_ALERTs cause problems?
-- Shuah
--
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