On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:36:12 +0900 Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > >>> printk is a special case, I think. It's the primary logging/debugging > >>> method which can't fail and as it's mostly interpreted by human beings > >>> (and developers in problematic cases), it has different maneuvering room > >>> on errors - ie. it's far better to print messages w/o header or proper > >>> log level than failing to print, which is quite different requirements > >>> from other components. > >> Andrew, any more comments or suggestions on how to proceed on this? > > > > Nope. > > > >> One > >> way or the other, I think this is a problem worth solving. > > > > There are a lot of such problems ;) > > So, I guess it's NACK w/o suggested alternatives, right? > I wouldn't nack without good reasons, and I have none here. I don't have very strong opinions either way. As a seat-of-the-pants thing, it does seem to be a lot of core code to solve a fairly minor problem in (afaik) one remote place. But I haven't looked - perhaps there are other places which could be improved if such facilities were available. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
