On Mon, 31 May 2010, David Miller wrote:
From: fthain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 21:07:09 +1000 (EST)
Apparently David now wants me to submit this again --
if (ei_debug)
pr_debug(...)
David, if that code is acceptable, please let me know.
The only thing I care about is at the moment that you don't do something
that ends up dropping the pr_fmt prefix.
The pr_fmt define at the beginning of the driver is for nothing if we
end up adding exceptions that end up eliding it for no good reason.
And that's what your patch was doing.
Since you have rejected my most recent patch submission, which uses pr_fmt
explicitly, I imagine that what you are trying to say here is that only
pr_debug or pr_info are acceptable.
Now, so that we don't have to go through pointless resubmission
iterations, can you tell me which of the following you prefer:
if (ei_debug)
pr_debug(...)
OR
if (ei_debug)
pr_info(...)
Thanks.
Finn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
