On 9/26/20 6:53 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > I suggest that these 2 new function names should be > printk_durable_name() > and > printk_durable_name_ratelimited() > > Those names would be closer to the printk* family of > function names. Of course, you can find exceptions to this, > like dev_printk(), but that is in the dev_*() family of > function names. durable_name_printk has the same argument signature as dev_printk with it's intention that in the future it might be a candidate to get changed to dev_printk. The reason I'm not using dev_printk is to avoid changing the content of the message users see. With this clarification, do you still suggest the rename or maybe suggest something different? dev_id_printk id_printk ... I'm also thinking that maybe we should add a new function do everything dev_printk does, but without prepending the device driver name and device name to the message. So we can get the metadata adds without having the content of the message change. Thanks
