On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 08:18:00PM +0200, holzheu wrote:Hi Greg,
Ick, why are you ignoring what we have already with dev_printk() anddev_printk() and friends are great, since they already define something
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?
like KMSG_COMPONENT: The driver name.
They provide way more than that, they also provide the explicit device
that is being discussed, as well as other things depending on the
So if you are going to do this, please use the already-in-place macros
to hook into, don't try to get the driver authors to pick up something
new and different, as it's going to be _very_ difficult, trust me...