Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:55:23 -0400 | From | Martin Hicks <> | Subject | Re: [patch] printk subsystems |
| |
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 03:05:07PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Well, #define DEBUG in the driver seems like the way to go. I do not > > like "subsystem ID" idea, because subsystems are not really well > > defined etc. > > > > I think that's a non-issue, because it's largely self-defining. It's > basically whatever the developers want them to be, because they're the > ones who it needs to make sense to.
Exactly right. The worst cases are: 1) developers assign messages to a completely wrong subsystem or 2) don't assign the printk to any subsystem, in which case we're in exactly the same situation as we are in now.
> It should, however, be an open set, not a closed set like in syslog.
I agree. I'll try to make it as easy as possible to add another subsystem.
I'm going to work on the sysctl interface for this next.
mh
-- Wild Open Source Inc. mort@wildopensource.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |