Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] kernel events layer | From | Robert Love <> | Date | Sat, 24 Jul 2004 01:41:42 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 2004-07-23 at 22:15 -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> This part worries me a lot. I would alsmost rather all possible > messages get stuck somewhere common so driver writes can't add these > ad-hoc and we can avoid a proliferation of either similar or pointless > messages.
I would be for this, although the situation is really no different than today with printk()'s, which I would hope could be replaced in some cases with the events (an either-or kind of deal). Dunno.
> Forcing these into a common place lets people eyeball if a new > messages really is necessary --- and it makes writing applications to > deal with these things easier (since you don't have to scan the entire > kernel tree).
This is a good idea for other reasons, too: the common base of errors could be certified as supported by the error daemon, translated, etc. etc.
I am not sure how realistic this goal is, but I do like it, at least for the general case of the usual errors in drivers.
Robert Love
- 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/
| |