On 6/26/20 7:45 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > Of course I agree that having a persistent identifier associated to > storage related log messages is useful and my previous mail was exactly > a part of discussion on the best way to achieving it. :-) > > I agree with James that dev_printk() usage is preferred over legacy > printk_emit() and I've described a way to do it correctly for libata. > > Unfortunately it means additional work for getting the new feature > merged so if you don't agree with doing it you need to convince: > > - Jens (libata Maintainer) to accept libata patch as it is > > or > > - James (& other higher level Maintainers) to use printk_emit() instead > > Ultimately they will be the ones merging/long-term supporting proposed > patches and not me.. Thank you for the helpful response, I appreciate it. I'll take a look at the information you've provided and re-work the patch series. I may have additional question(s) :-) -Tony
