On Jun 24, 2008 00:20 +0200, FD Cami wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:31:07 -0600 > Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > The one issue is that KERN_ERR != KERN_WARNING, so these errors might > > not be visible on the console, or may not be saved to the syslog. > > Hmmm, I did not replace any KERN_ERR by ext3_warning / KERN_WARNING, but > made those KERN_ERR calls more verbose. Does that change anything ? My apologies, when I started reading the patch I was thinking it replaced all of the printk's in ext3_fill_super(), which it in fact does not. > For the record, I wanted to replace KERN_ERR calls by calls to a wrapper > much like ext3_warning (but obviously calling KERN_ERR), later on. OK, that's in line with what I was suggesting. Carry on :-). > > Note that you need to split up the patches for ext2, ext3, ext4 into > > separate emails. I'd suggest just sending one of them until we agree > > on what is right, then submitting the rest afterward. > > OK. I did ext3/ext4 at once because of what Andrew replied to Kasper : > "We like to keep ext3 and ext4 in sync as much as poss, please." > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/9/79 > But I can do ext3 first and then back / forward port to ext2 and ext4 as > well, as you suggest. Yes, it is definitely desirable to have patches for all of them, but always in separate emails. If you feel the patches are ready to go, then go ahead and send all 3 at once. I just thought it might save some work and list traffic if we agree on one of the patches and then produce the other two to match. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
