[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1432341390.29657.29.camel@perches.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 17:36:30 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: "Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
Cc: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
Michael Shuey <shuey@...due.edu>,
"<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"<kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"<HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org>" <HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org>,
"<lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>" <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl
fixes
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 00:25 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
> On May 22, 2015, at 8:18 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve
> >>>> lustre_error/lustre_debug?
> >>>
> >>> The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's
> >>> at least misleading unless you completely understand the
> >>> code.
> >>
> >> Or you know, you might take the function name at the face value
> >> and assume that CERROR means it's an error and CDEBUG means it's a debug message?
> >
> > Maybe, but I think that it'd be better if the mechanism
> > it uses was more plainly named something like lustre_log.
>
> While the idea seems good, the biggest obstacle here is such that
> there's already a thing called lustre log (llog for short too) -
> it's kind of a distributed journal of operations.
>
> Its there a different synonym, I wonder?
Maybe: lustre_printk, lustre_logmsg, lustre_output
--
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