On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 11:08 +0400, Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 09:37 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > Joe Perches (2): > > hfs/hfsplus: Convert dprint to hfs_dbg > > hfs/hfsplus: Convert printks to pr_<level> [] > But I have some additional suggestions: > (1) I think that it makes sense to use no_printk() for the case when we > don't need in debug output. I don't. no_printk is used simply to get gcc to verify format and args with __printf(). The equivalent is already done by the if (DBG_##FLAG & DBG_MASK) printk(...) when DBG_MASK is 0 > (2) I think that it is really necessary to add info about file and line > number for the case of debug output. I don't. I think file/line is pretty useless. Adding dynamic_debug could be useful, but that's another patch. Also, checkpatch can be a useful tool, but all its warnings aren't necessary to always be fixed. Also, please remember to trim your replies. It's not necessary to quote the entire email. Just quote the useful contextual bits. _Lots_ of people read this list and you can cause a lot to waste time looking for additional comments you don't make. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
