On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 19:45:14 +0100, Ingo Molnar said: > - in the last stable kernel, v2.6.32, still more new printk()s were > introduced than pr_*() lines: > > $ git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep '^+.*\<pr_' | wc -l > 2016 > $ git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep '^+.*\<printk' | wc -l > 3531 Ahem. That's not introduced, that's 'added or modified'. % git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep -C 5 '^+.*\<pr_' | head - * In case of failure continue with no timer. */ + /* Test if the external timer can be actually used. + * In case of failure continue without timer. */ if (unlikely((stmmac_open_ext_timer(dev, priv->tm)) < 0)) { - pr_warning("stmmaceth: cannot attach the HW timer\n"); + pr_warning("stmmaceth: cannot attach the external timer.\n"); tmrate = 0; priv->tm->freq = 0; priv->tm->timer_start = stmmac_no_timer_started; priv->tm->timer_stop = stmmac_no_timer_stopped; Meanwhile, the fact that there's only about a 2-to-1 difference in patches when there's a 6-to-1 difference in existing code tells me that proportionally, there is *more* activity with pr_foo variants than printk. printk: 3531 hits in 61126 uses = 5.7% churn pr_foo: 2016 hits in 10861 uses = 18.5% churn The numbers need much deeper analysis to make any sort of real statistical conclusion here... > > An estimated completion of the 'conversion' to pr_*() to be in infinite numbe r > of years. > > > [...] just removing the "sched:" would be better for consistency. > > > > Or alternatively... deprecate pr_*? > > Or alternatively, my favorite: let people who write the code use whichever > variant they prefer. > > Ingo
Attachment:
pgpzI2rWJhNrf.pgp
Description: PGP signature