[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b93a8882649e69819e01b44d621f1fc33a7467da.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 08:36:14 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, senozhatsky@...omium.org,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/28] lib/printbuf: New data structure for printing
strings
On Thu, 2022-05-26 at 11:21 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 05:06:15PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The "pr_" prefix is a nightmare for me because the same prefix
> > is used also for printk() API ;-)
> >
> > Could we please use "pb_" instead?
>
> I'm not entirely against that, but I see printbufs as already in this patchset
> tightly coupled to vsprintf.c and thus quite related to printk, as well - and
> there aren't that many different pr_ things. So I think the shared prefix makes
> some sense, I'd like to hear what others think before making that change.
I think the reused prefix is not good.
bufs are not printks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists