Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 8 Nov 2010 08:55:26 -0800 | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] include/linux/kernel.h: Add config option for pr_fmt(fmt) |
| |
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 07:33:42AM -0500, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Joe, > > Sorry for the late answer. > > On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:10:50 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 10:43 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Besides, linux-next is meant for integration testing. We already know > > > that the change will integrate fine, in that it won't cause a build > > > failure or runtime crash. We also know that, without the tree-wide > > > cleanup of many driver, the change will cause duplicate prefixes in > > > many messages. > > > > > > There's little point in testing something we know will not be good > > > enough. Better prepare all the driver patches, and test the whole thing > > > when it's ready. I know it will be a very large and intrusive patchset, > > > but this can certainly be done with Andrew's support. > > > > I think you underestimate the time, effort and acceptance > > levels by the various arches and maintainers required. > > > > Also, it's not just drivers, it's arch, lib, and kernel. > > (...) > > I've had time to think about it all some more, and I have to admit that > my counter-proposal doesn't really fly. Changing everything at once > throughout the whole kernel tree is simply too difficult. > > So I hate to admit it, but your initial proposal was certainly better, > because it can be done one subsystem at a time. So I think we should > forget about my objections and go on with your first patchset. > I pretty much came to the same conclusion. No objections here anymore either.
Guenter
| |