On Sun, 2006-08-06 at 20:46 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > I think we should probably switch sdev_printk() to its own custom > implementation rather than just calling dev_printk(). Greg didn't seem > to be interested in fixing the problem that we have with dev_printk(); > presumably he has some other users in mind for which the current > dev_printk behaviour is useful. > > How does something like the following look (compile tested): What issues with dev_printk? It does make a lot of sense to have a single tap for errors, just in case someone decides to resurrect the enterprise logging patches, which would use something like dev_printk as the discriminator. James - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
